Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

France and the ICC

By JOHN V. WHITBECK | CounterPunch | September 3, 2013

Now that Prime Minister David Cameron has sought parliamentary approval for “military action” against Syria and President Barack Obama has announced his intention to seek congressional approval, can President François Hollande, as a political if not a strictly constitutional matter, afford not to do likewise?

A parliamentary session devoted to Syria is already scheduled for September 4, although no formal vote had been planned.

Hollande’s Socialist Party has a comfortable majority in the National Assembly and a razor-thin majority in the Senate. Party discipline in France tends to be more rigid and dependable than in the U.S. and the U.K., but the most recent poll showed 64% of the French people opposed to French involvement in any “military action” against Syria.

It would therefore be both highly interesting and encouraging for the future of democracy in France if Hollande were to permit a free and open debate and vote on this important issue.

However, there is another important issue which Hollande should keep in mind or factor into his thinking if no one has yet alerted to it.

When the Rome Statute establishing the International Criminal Court was being negotiated, certain Western states insisted on a seven-year moratorium before the “crime of aggression” was added to the crimes over which the ICC would have jurisdiction if they were committed either by a State Party of the ICC or on the territory a State Party. This effectively gave habitual and potential aggressors a window of opportunity to continue committing acts of aggression, which was very fortunate for former British prime minister Tony Blair, whose country is a State Party but who therefore enjoys immunity and impunity (at least insofar as ICC jurisdiction is concerned) with respect to his role in the crime of aggression against Iraq in 2003.

However, that window of opportunity was closed on June 11, 2010, when the crime of aggression was inserted into the Rome Statute as one of the crimes over which the ICC now has jurisdiction.

While neither Syria nor the United States is among the 122 States Parties of the ICC (so that only a referral by the UN Security Council can give the ICC jurisdiction over their citizens or over crimes committed on their territory), France is a State Party of the ICC.

Article 8bis (1) of the Rome Statute, as added in 2010, reads: “For the purposes of this Statute, ‘crime of aggression’ means the planning, preparation, initiation or execution, by a person in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State, of an act of aggression which, by its character, gravity and scale, constitutes a manifest violation of the Charter of the United Nations.” Included in the subsequent listing of acts constituting “aggression” is, at Article 8bis (2)(b): “Bombardment by the armed forces of a State against the territory of another State or the use of any weapons by a State against the territory of another State.”

In the absence of a UN Security Council resolution authorizing “military action” against Syria, these provisions fit the aggression being planned by Presidents Obama and Hollande “like a glove”. Even the most imaginative defense lawyer would struggle to imagine a defense.

The ICC is understandably uncomfortable with the awkward fact that, in over a decade of existence, it has indicted only Africans. If for no other reason than the institutional imperative of the court’s own credibility, there is a compelling need to indict some non-African as soon as the court’s restricted jurisdiction and the gravity and exemplarity of a crime permit.

Nothing could enhance the credibility of the court more than the indictment of the head of state or government of one of the major Western powers.

At the same time, nothing else could so constructively enhance the concept and stature of international law, the belief that international law is not simply (as it has tended to be) a stick with which the rich and powerful beat the poor and weak and the idea that even the rich and powerful do not enjoy immunity and impunity before the rules of international law.

Indeed, nothing else could so effectively enhance the chances for a more peaceful world.

For any number of good reasons, it is to be fervently hoped that, in the end, François Hollande will not choose to participate in the “planning, preparation, initiation or execution” of the crime of aggression against Syria. However, should he do so, his transfer to The Hague could be the only good result of this folly.

John V. Whitbeck is a Paris-based international lawyer.

September 3, 2013 Posted by | Militarism, Timeless or most popular, War Crimes | , , , , , | 1 Comment

South Africa: Obama Docket

Muslim Lawyers Association Press Release | June 26, 2013

Lawyers will continue to pursue the case against Obama in the courts

Johannesburg, South Africa – The Muslim Lawyers Association (MLA) brought an application to court on Tuesday, 25 June 2013, to charge US President Barack Obama with a number of crimes, before he enters South Africa on Friday, 28 June 2013.

The North Gauteng High Court today found that the merits of the matter could not be heard as it was not deemed to be sufficiently ‘urgent’. This is despite the imminent arrival of Obama in South Africa this week. However, the (MLA) will continue to pursue the matter through the ordinary course of the courts.

Given the sheer magnitude, gravity, extent and degree of these crimes, as well as the unrelenting vigour with which the Obama Administration continues to commit them, the MLA intends to pursue the review application in accordance with the normal court time periods applicable.

“It is regrettable for the court not to have adjudicated on the merits of the ‘Obama Docket’ at an expedient time when Obama’s visit to the Republic is imminent”, states MLA spokesperson, Attorney Yousha Tayob.

The Obama Docket contains:

– evidence of indiscriminate killing of civilians by the use of USA military drones

– a public acknowledgment by Obama that he authorised the extra judicial assassinations of US citizens and that civilians have been killed by drone attacks authorised by him

– evidence of the continued incarceration without trial of persons detained at Guantanamo Bay and other US detention facilities, and

– evidence that the United States has engaged in rendition programmes contrary
to the prescripts of the norms and standards of International Law.

“South Africa has adopted and ratified the Rome Statute into our law and is therefore obliged to fulfil both its domestic and international responsibilities”, adds Tayob.

The MLA remains undeterred in its resolve to pursue all legal avenues to expose the past and ongoing War Crimes, Crimes against Humanity and Genocide committed by Obama and his administration and is committed to have him brought before a South African court of law or the International Criminal Court to answer the allegations contained in the ‘Obama Docket’.

For more information on the Obama Docket and its contents, or for interviews with an MLA representative, call Attorney Yousha Tayob, + 27 82 926 5408 or email at info@mlajhb.com or visit the MLA website at http:// http://www.mlajhb.com

Related article

June 27, 2013 Posted by | Progressive Hypocrite, Subjugation - Torture, War Crimes | , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on South Africa: Obama Docket

Occupied Lives: They terrorize us in our homes

PCHR | October 3, 2012
Haniya, in her home in al Nussairat.

On Monday, 10 September, 2012, Israeli warplanes launched 2 missiles at a vast tract of land in the west of al-Nussairat refugee camp in the Middle Area of the Gaza Strip. As a result, 2 rooms and a container on the land were destroyed. 10 olive trees and 23 houses were also damaged. Additionally, 7 Palestinian civilians, including 4 children and 2 women, were wounded. This attack targeted civilian objects which is a violation of international law.

Haniya Abdul Hadi Kabaja (60) is one of the women who sustained minor injuries on the night of the attack. She recounts that: “At around 2.00am in the night, we woke up to the sound of shelling. We were all very scared but we went back to sleep. 15 or so minutes later, we heard more shelling and shrapnel hitting surfaces outside. Something hit my face and, when I touched it, I felt myself bleeding. My son, Anas, saw this and he started screaming for his brothers to come and help me. After they offered me first aid, we heard my ten-year-old granddaughter, Reema, crying, and that is when we noticed that she had also been wounded, in her leg.”

An ambulance arrived after a while, and Haniya and her granddaughter were taken to Al Aqsa Martyrs hospital. Their wounds were moderate and they were discharged soon after.

Until now, Haniya and her family have unanswered questions with regard to the attack. They do not know what the exact target was: “All of us were terrified, because the missiles were launched about 100m from where we live. Other people in the neighborhood also got injured by the shrapnel from the missiles. Some windows were smashed and there is clear damage to some of the asbestos roofs. In this area, there have been no incidents since Cast Lead. Nobody really knows why they launched missiles on an empty piece of land, and so close to where people live.”

Since the attack, Haniya’s family has been living in constant fear of further attack. This has had a particularly negative impact on the children: “The attack has really frightened the children. They used to go out after dark to play or to visit relatives who live in neighboring houses. Now, they do not even step outside after darkness falls because they are too scared. They are not the only ones who are scared. Even we, the adults, feel the same way. At the same time, we know that there is nothing we can say against the Israeli occupation. We cannot do anything about it either.”

Haniya’s son, Mohammed (32), hopes to see an end to the attacks on unarmed civilians and calls for the respect of everyone’s rights. “I just want to see the situation change and an end to the Israeli occupation. We are unarmed civilians, yet they follow us and continue to attack and terrorize us in our homes. They hurt my mother and my daughter, yet they had not even done anything. We have not caused problems for anyone and the only thing we demand is our rights, our land and our freedom. We are peaceful people and we want it to remain that way. After all these years of being attacked, we will not stop demanding our rights. Even if they kill all of us and only 10 people remain, we will still demand for those rights.”

The direct targeting of a civilian object constitutes a war crime, as codified in Article 8(2) (b) (ii) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Similarly, under Article 53 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, the destruction of private property is prohibited unless rendered absolutely necessary by military operations. Intentionally launching an indiscriminate attack constitutes a war crime as defined in Article 8 (2) (b) of the Rome Statute of the ICC.  Furthermore, according to the principle of proportionality, which is codified in Article 51 (5) (b) of Additional Protocol 1 to the Geneva Conventions, an attack that may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects or a combination thereof is considered excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.

Related articles

October 4, 2012 Posted by | Aletho News | , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Occupied Lives: They terrorize us in our homes

Occupied Lives: I have no future

Palestine Center for Human Rights | August 8, 2012

Ahmad Dalloul in front of his destroyed factory in Tel-el-hawa

Mamoun Ahmad Dalloul (36) lives in Tel-el-hawa with his wife and 9 children.  Until recently, he owned a dairy-products factory that produced milk, cheese and yoghurt.  Since December 2008, Mamoun has re-built his factory 4 times after it was repeatedly targeted and destroyed by Israel’s forces.  On 04 June 2012, at around 1:00, his factory was targeted and destroyed by Israel’s forces for the 5th time.

On the evening of the most recent attack, Mamoun received a call from his brother, who lives adjacent to the factory, informing him that the factory had been destroyed by a missile from an F16: “I rushed to my factory and, when I arrived, there were firefighters and police.  The neighbors were panicking and standing in the streets.  I was told that a missile had hit the factory and then penetrated 6 or 7 meters into the ground.  There was something like an earthquake for 5 minutes, and then the missile exploded and pulled everything into the crater.  I do not know what kind of missile it was.”

After 5 attacks on his factory, Mamoun is devastated: “The first time my factory was destroyed was in December 2008 during Operation Cast Lead.  The factory was very big and on the ground floor of our residential apartment.  I received a call from Israel’s forces, who told me that the building would be targeted in the next 15 minutes. My family and I fled immediately.  3 missiles were fired from an F16 and the building was completely destroyed.  In just a few minutes, we lost everything.  We were suddenly homeless and I had lost my only source of a livelihood.”

Mamoun and his family were forced to shuffle from one household to another, looking for a place to stay: “We would stay at my parents’ house for a few days then move to my brother-in-law’s house and spend a few more at my brother’s house.  My son kept asking why we had no home.  Finally, as my wife is a refugee, UNRWA built us a single residential unit.  I then rebuilt my factory in Sabra, which is in central Gaza City.  It was very small and modest because there was barely any construction material in Gaza, as well as money constraints.  6 months later, it was destroyed by Israel’s forces.  I then partnered with someone else and tried to rebuild in a different location, but it was destroyed while we were still constructing.”


A crater made by the missile fired from an F16 on 04 June 2012

At this point, Mamoun had given up and decided to not rebuild his factory: “The first 2 times, I rebuilt because this is my only source of a livelihood.  There are hardly any employment opportunities in Gaza.  My factory provided work for 120 individuals, including my 3 brothers and my son.  I saw how they were all suffering without work and thought that the factory would at least provide them with the income to support themselves and their families.  I had enough after the 3rd attack, but a representative of the European Commission came to visit from Jerusalem and said they would mediate on my behalf.  They promised that the factory would not be targeted again.  Each time I bought new machines, they came and took pictures and reassured me all was well.  I was encouraged by this and started to develop the factory slowly.  Then, just like that, it was targeted and destroyed again.  They did not keep their promise.”

Each attack has resulted in severe economic hardship for Mamoun and his family: “I have had to borrow money and my savings are almost depleted.  I sold 2 pieces of my land to rebuild my factory.  I even sold the house that UNRWA gave us to set up the factory and have a source of income.  I can no longer sustain the expenses for my family.  For a while, people would not even let me rent an apartment in their buildings, because they thought it would be targeted.”

Mamoun feels that his story is one of many that illustrate the suffering of Gaza: “There are people who are displaced and dying.  I know what it feels like to be homeless.  My children have had to grow up seeing dead people, war and destruction.  They no longer even react to airstrikes, because this is what they are used to.  My factory was a civilian establishment and I did not plan any resistance activities there.  Why would I want to put my family in such danger?  I am tired of this destruction.  I have no future now.  Why can’t we be left to live in peace and stability like other people in the world?”

The direct targeting of a civilian object constitutes a war crime, as codified in Article 8(2)(b)(ii) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.  Similarly, under the Fourth Geneva Convention Article 53, the destruction of private property is prohibited unless rendered absolutely necessary by military operations.  The destruction of such factories infringes upon human rights principles, including the right to work and right to attain an adequate standard of living contained in Article 11 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

Related articles

August 10, 2012 Posted by | Illegal Occupation, Subjugation - Torture, Timeless or most popular, Video, War Crimes | , , , , | Comments Off on Occupied Lives: I have no future