States send clear message to U.S.:
Don’t expect permanent exemption from ICC
NEW YORK - As the U.S. continued to press for a two-tier system of
justice for serious human rights crimes, U.N. member states showed
that they have other plans. Today the Security Council voted 12-0
to renew the controversial resolution 1422, shielding UN peacekeepers
from the ICC for a further year. But three states abstained, robbing
the U.S. of a consensus. And in a meeting open to non-Security Council
members preceding the vote, states expressed overwhelming support
for the new Court and serious concerns about the resolution.
The Lawyers Committee is disappointed that the resolution, which
reflects U.S. continuing efforts to undermine the ICC, was adopted.
However we are encouraged by the fact that even states that voted
for the resolution made clear this was not an automatic renewal:
“States showed today that they were not ready to simply bow
to the will of the United States and rubberstamp the resolution”,
said Fiona McKay, director of the Lawyers Committee’s International
Justice Program. “The U.S. has been put on notice that it
must expect a reassessment of the circumstances every year and that
it cannot expect the exemptions to become permanent.”
States abstaining from voting for the resolution included one permanent
member, France, as well as Germany and Syria. In explaining its
reasons for abstaining, France said it was not appropriate to renew
the resolution at the very time when the ICC was starting to operate,
and that such a move would only weaken the Court and harm its authority.
Before the vote, delegates speaking on behalf of more than 50 non-Security
Council members representing all regions of the world expressed
their strong support for the ICC and their concerns at the renewal
of the resolution. Many stressed that the Rome Statute contained
more than adequate safeguards against politically motivated prosecutions
- which the U.S. says it fears from the Court - and stated
their own fears at the serious harm being done to the ICC, to international
law, and to the Security Council itself by the resolution.
Particularly welcome were strong expressions of support for the
Court from states that are not yet parties to the ICC treaty, including
China and Russia.
Secretary-General Kofi Annan warned Council members that the Rome
Statute was not intended to cover such a sweeping request, and expressed
his hope that renewal of the resolution would not become an annual
routine. “If it did so”, he said, “I fear the
world would interpret it as meaning that this Council wished to
claim absolute and permanent immunity for people serving in the
operations it establishes or authorizes. And if that were to happen,
it would undermine not only the authority of the ICC but also the
authority of this Council, and the legitimacy of United Nations
peacekeeping.”
The U.S. asserts that its opposition to the ICC is based on fear:
fear that the Court will instigate politically motivated prosecutions
against U.S. nationals. Such fears are not only misplaced, but an
insult to the 18 distinguished judges and the highly qualified Chief
Prosecutor, as well as the states that recently elected them. Many
states today expressed their confidence in the composition of the
new Court.
|
