ICC Adds Aggression to List of Crimes Despite US Opposition By Jenna Greene

[Demeter]

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article25726.htm

LegalTimes" -- KAMPALA - In a move that international lawyers describe as "a giant leap," members of the International Criminal Court agreed to add aggression to the court's short list of prosecutable crimes.

The United States opposed the resolution, but as a non-member of the eight-year old court, had no ability to block the adoption.

Still, it was notable that the United States even showed up for the debate.

State Department Legal Advisor Harold Koh and Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes Issues Stephen Rapp led a sizeable U.S. delegation to a two week meeting in Kampala, Uganda. It ended early in the morning on Saturday with the consensus adoption of the definition of aggression and mechanisms for triggering an investigation.

The resolution will not go into effect until at least 2017, and the court has no jurisdiction to bring aggression chares against nationals from non-ICC member countries, which include the U.S., Russia and China. Even member countries have a way to opt-out.

The ICC is intended as a court of last resort to punish crimes that shock the conscience – genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and now aggression – when there is no ability to do so at the national level.

Under the administration of President George W. Bush, the United States had virtually no involvement with the ICC. In 2000, President Bill Clinton signed the Rome statute that created the court, but never brought the treaty to the Senate for a vote. In 2002, the Bush Administration sent a document “unsigning” Clinton’s acceptance. One hundred and eleven nations are ICC members.

The U.S. has been concerned that the court could attempt to prosecute American military members deployed overseas, even those on peacekeeping missions to stop war crimes....

[iamtechus]

1. As a non-member the US has no standing to do squat!

[Solly Mack]

2. k/r

[provis99]

3. everything the US supported in the Nuremberg trials they are now opposed to.

Genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, waging aggressive war: these were all things we convicted the Germans of. I can see why the US wouldn't listen to the ICC, now that we've done all of them too.

[applegrove]

4. The ICC is BRILLIANT!

[Diclotican]

6. applegrove

applegrove

It is somewhat funny to thing that the mighty UNited states of America is afraid of the ICC, who have no armed forces. and who in practis terms was made posible, by the US and other great powers..

And we all know what the Chenneys and the Bushes and CO wanted to do, if an american soldiers was put into the prison in HAAG, To answeer for their posible crimes.. Navy Seals going to war with the Dutch police, and posible also the dutch forces - who have some of the best special forces in the world (dont take my word for it, but navy Seals sucks when going hand on hand with some of the special forces in the Nederlands)..

Dicloican

[applegrove]

7. I meant that the psychopaths are over the top aggressive and it is could

that this aspect of their personality will cause action by the ICC. The USA is not nearly as aggressive as your megolomaniac psychopathic leader. This law is good news indeed.

[Diclotican]

8. applegrove

applegrove

And I am in full agreement with that too.. The people who have been attacing, and killing sivilians, in war, shoudl be hold accontable for what they have been doing. Regardness if they are italian, norwigian, or american.. It is Not one law for the US, and the rest have to follow other laws. Either US ia land of laws, or they are not...

And it is maybe time, to put an end to what I se as blatant, american propaganda where american soldiers, is shown as shinning knights on horses, even tho they are less than shining knights, rather thugs (in to many ccses) who have been known to muder sivilians, becouse they "belived" to be under attac from that general area..

The US for some reason dosent like ICC, even tho United States of America, was one of the few, who wanted to get an trial when it came to the german prmiment figures after world war two.. The french, the british, and clearly the russians, want just to hang Goering and CO by their neck, and it was mostly becouse of the power the US had in post war europe, and the clear wiee americans had to make the crminal face their past who won the day, and who in the end, ended up with 12 hang men, and a lot of others, who was closed behind bars for many years... Most known is maybe Hess, who was sitting in Spandau since 1945 to his death in 1988..

Now US dosen't even want to be an signatur to the ICC, who in most cases could be seen to be the grand child of the Nurenberg trial, where for the first time the leaders of a country who had been waged war was taken into custody, and have to face what they had been doing.. And if half the stories who are floating around is true, then US indeed have a lot to answer for when it came to crimes in war torn country... A lot more than most americans seen to reqonise..

And no I know that most americans are not like this.. They are kind loving peopole who would go out of their way to make others comfortable.. Most of them I have enqountered is gentle, nice people who some I would say is my friends, (and I am not using that word esay) who I have nothing bad to say about)..

Diclotican

[Diclotican]

5. Demeter

Demeter

Good, Now can we start the prosess to get Mr Bush et all in the Hague, so they can get their day in court, to answer for THEIR aggression against other country - and act of war crimes.. The soldiers in the field have also their parts to answer for in this case. As the Nurenberg trial in 1946 cleary states, you don't hve a defence saying that you just followed order when you killed sivilians - as many have shown the US in Iraq have been doing on a regular basis for the last 6-8 years now (No Im not saying that american soldiers in regular is murderres, what I say is that TO MANY american soldiers have been shown to misuse their might for everything its worth the last 6-8 year..)

As an american proverb goes. If you do the crime, you do the time also. And it is maybe time for americans to wake up to the reality, that the brave soldiers are not that nice after all.. And that some of them also have been doing some really nasty crimes against humanity, and that it is maybe time that they face up to their crimes.. In the ICC at least the americans could get a fair chance, and give their proof that they have not been doing criminal actions. And if sentendence to time in prisjon the Prison where qulity one is confined to, would be far better than anything a US prison would have to offer.. They might even got some money to get some products who are on sale in the prison. And after a couple of years, maybe even freetime outside the prison, so they can get to know the world outside the prison system. You know, going to a movie, going a theather, and so on.. And the cell itself is far better in most europeans prison than in the US.. The overcrowding is not that large, and it is LAW that you might even got their own cell, withouth a cell friend.. And they can also get schooling, and off course medical help when needed.. And compared to most american prisons, where the gang "own" the prison inside the walls, in most european prisons the officers have some resemble of controll, far better than in the US where the guards maybe own the key to the door, but not the inside...

Diclotican