UN Security Council not interested in ICC pleas

Amid worsening violence in Sudan’s Darfur region, a frustrated International Criminal Court prosecutor pleaded on Monday for the United Nations Security Council to take action to ensure justice “for the long-suffering victims of atrocity crimes.”

Wanted President Omar Hassan al-Bashir has traveled freely within Africa and has not yet been arrested.

The Hague-based court issued an arrest warrant for Sudan’s President al-Bashir, who is accused of crimes including alleged genocide in the country’s western Darfur province, in March 2009.

Yet Bashir rejects the court’s authority.

“It is long overdue for you to heed the cries of the victims of rape and sexual abuse, torture, mass displacement and other inhumane suffering Darfurians continue to endure,” said ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda.

The United States, Britain and France have said the suffering in Darfur was at its worst level in a decade.

“Innocent civilians continue to bear the brunt of insecurity and instability, in particular as a result of what appears to be an ongoing government campaign to target them,” Bensouda said.

“The people alleged to be most responsible for these ongoing atrocities are the same people against whom warrants of arrest have already been issued,” she said.

The ICC’s Bensouda said the court had made ten referrals to the Security Council for non-compliance, including Sudan, Chad, Kenya, Djibouti, Malawi and Democratic Republic of Congo, but the 15-member council has not responded to any of the referrals.

Source: Reuters

Palestinian submission an ‘ICC credibility test’

The Palestinian Authority has submitted the first evidence of alleged Israeli war crimes committed during the Gaza conflict in 2014 to the International Criminal Court, seeking to accelerate the investigation of these abuses.

After meeting the ICC chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda, Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Maliki said that he had submitted the dossiers concerning the 2014 Gaza war, as well as Israeli settlements on the occupied Palestinian land and treatment of Palestinian prisoners in Israel.

“Palestine is a test for the credibility of international mechanisms … a test the world cannot afford to fail. Palestine has decided to seek justice, not vengeance,” Maliki said.

He also added that he had agreed with prosecutors on a date of their visit to Palestine, although he did not reveal the exact time. “It depends on their ability to enter Palestinian territory without problems,” he added.

ICC prosecutors intend to make a field visits both to Palestine and Israel, but they have not received a formal permission from Israel yet, Reuters reports.

In the interview to RT, former special rapporteur to the UN Human Rights Council concerning Palestinian affairs said that International Criminal Court “faces a real credibility test”, as “if chief prosecutor fails to open any investigation into crimes committed in Palestine, there is a real danger that the ICC will fall apart…”

Israel denied all allegations of war crimes against its soldiers as well as disputed the UN report on alleged war crimes by claiming that its soldiers had upheld the “highest international standards.” It also accused Palestinian militants of firing thousands of rockets at Israeli population centers.

John Dugard said that Israel had just white-washed all involvement of its forces in any abuses during the 2014 Gaza war as it is clearly determined not to prosecute its soldiers for the crimes committed during this conflict.

ANC to review ICC participation

The minister in the Presidency Jeff Radebe has announced that South Africa will review its participation in the International Criminal Court.

Small business development minister, Lindiwe Zulu, said during a parliamentary debate “Africa’s newest state‚ the Republic of South Sudan‚ would not be in existence today had the parties placed the issue of justice above all others.

“This does not mean that there is no role for justice for victims of conflicts. It means that recognising the complexities inherent in conflict resolution‚ it is best to address the question of justice in the context of a political settlement.”

The main thrust of her argument was that Africa required a special political dispensation.

“It should therefore be noted that‚ our efforts for the renewal of the continent will remain void if the fundamentals elements which include peace and stability are not realised. Peace and stability is therefore an important ingredient for development,” she said.

When the speaker called time on her, she concluded that South Africa would not allow the prosecution of a sitting head of state.

The consensus reached between the ANC and EFF is that the International Criminal Court has an anti-African bias, that it is tool of western powers to undermine “the weak” as Mantashe’s stated.

The largest bloc of countries consists of 34 African states, followed by 27 Latin American and Caribbean States. There are 19 from the Asia-Pacific region and 18 from eastern Europe. A further 25 come from western Europe and elsewhere.

Under the ICC’s Rome Statute terms‚ heads of state do not enjoy immunity.

Radebe said SA has to balance its obligations to the ICC with its obligations to the AU and individual states. In addition‚ he asserted‚ the ICC must have been aware that SA‚ in execution of the warrant‚ would breach its agreement with the AU.

President Jacob Zuma’s government is facing the risk of criminal charges over its handling of Al Bashir’s departure from the country last week.

Pretoria High Court Judge Dunstan Mlambo yesterday said the departure of the Sudanese president – who is wanted for war crimes – despite a court ruling barring him from leaving pending a decision on whether to execute a warrant of arrest against him‚ demonstrated the state’s disregard for the order.

The judge issued a grave warning‚ stating: “If the state or an organ of state‚ or state officials don’t abide by court orders‚ the democratic edifice will crumble stone by stone until it collapses and chaos ensues”.

Government to present affidavit on Bashir’s departure

Government is expected to present an affidavit to the High Court in Pretoria on Wednesday on why it let Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir leave the country against the interim court order prohibiting his departure.

The court also ruled that al-Bashir should be detained under an International Criminal Court (ICC) indictment on war crime charges.

Government will have to explain why it allowed the Sudanese President to leave the country.

Government earlier said it offered al-Bashir immunity because he was attending an African Union summit in Johannesburg. The ICC in Hague indicted al-Bashir for war crimes in Sudan’s western Darfur in 2003.

The ANC is calling on government to temporarily suspend South Africa’s membership of the International Criminal Court.

It follows controversy over Sudanese president Omar al-Bashir’s recent trip to South Africa.

The ANC has already urged government to work with other African states to protect the ICC from so-called undue influence from non-member states.

The party says the ICC is no longer useful.

Instead, the ANC says the court has allowed itself to be a proxy for powerful non-member states who want to persecute African leaders and effect regime change on the continent.

Opposition MPs said the government had undermined the rule of law it had sworn to protect by helping al-Bashir, who is facing genocide and crimes against humanity in the International Criminal Court, leave South Africa.

The ANC insisted the issue was sub judice.

Said DA MP Stevens Mokgalapa: “The government, under President [Jacob] Zuma, has failed to uphold the constitution, has failed the people of South Africa and those who were murdered and displaced in Darfur.”

DA MP James Selfe asked the government to stop referring to al-Bashir as “his excellency”.

“The only thing he is excellent at is killing people,” said Selfe.

He pointed out that al-Bashir stood accused of a leading role in the genocide of 300000 black Africans.

Several MPs acknowledged that the International Criminal Court is unfairly targeting African leaders.

The Economic Freedom Fighters’ Chief Whip Floyd Shivambu says the court’s prosecution selection process needs to be reviewed.

“We do not agree with the selective prosecution of the ICC for Africans, because it looks like it has only existed for Africans since its establishment.”

“Also it was naive for whoever took the government to court to think that it can be wise to arrest a head of state here in South Africa. It was going to lead to instability in the origin country where he came from, it was going to even threaten our security in South Africa, but also it was going to lead to the undermining of the statute of South Africa in the international context,” Shivambu added.

COPE leader Mosiuoa Lekota said what had been done in the name of South Africa was a serious crime.

The Freedom Front Plus says government has exposed the ANC as a party that does not respect human rights.

“Sir, forget about Fifa. The Al-Bashir crisis makes the Fifa version look like a Sunday school picnic,” Freedom Front Plus leader, Pieter Mulder said.

“No other executive act has ever exposed the ANC as a human rights violator on such a grand scale to the whole world. Ons gaan die prys betaal hiervoor vir baie jare nog.”

SA troops ‘held hostage’ in Sudan

The Sudanese government of president Omar al-Bashir literally held a gun to South Africa’s head to secure his safe return to Khartoum.

Netwerk24 can reveal that about 800 South African soldiers in Darfur were held “hostage” by Sudanese troops when the drama around Al-Bashir’s possible arrest in South Africa escalated.

According to military experts, this effectively means Sudan blackmailed South Africa and the soldiers’ lives served as a guarantee for Al-Bashir’s safe return.

Only after Al-Bashir safely touched down in Khartoum on Monday, were Sudanese troops withdrawn. President Jacob Zuma is the commander-in-chief of the defence force.

“We were so scared – we were surrounded by soldiers. We handed out extra ammunition to all our troops in case they needed it,” said one South African soldier in Sudan on Tuesday.

“I am so thankful that South Africa did not arrest Bashir. The battalion commander said after Bashir touched down safely in Khartoum, all the [Sudanese] troops were withdrawn. The calamity has returned to normal,” reads a message sent by a soldier in Darfur to his friends in South Africa.

About 1 400 South African soldiers are serving in Darfur as part of a combined African Union/United Nations peace mission (Unamid). The current group are from 8 SA Infantry Battalion in Upington.

“Our nerves were shot and we were very relieved when the militants withdrew on Monday evening. We knew we were sitting ducks,” said a South African soldier.

Unamid said it was unaware of the situation.

Katie Hopkins’ ‘viscous, xenophobic & racist’ journalism referred to ICC

A UK law society has stepped up its pursuit of the Sun and its ‘Nazi propaganda’ spouting columnist Katie Hopkins over alleged anti-migrant hate speech, referring both to a powerful international court usually reserved for war criminals.

The Society of Black Lawyers, which originally reported the column written by Hopkins and published by the Sun just hours before 800 migrants drowned in the Mediterranean, has referred the case to the International Criminal Court (ICC).

The SBL’s efforts come after UN human rights chief Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein said the column – in which Hopkins referred to migrants as “cockroaches” – recalled Europe’s darkest days of fascist hate speech and “Nazi propaganda.”

“The case is an exceptionally strong one as the incitement of racial hatred in Hopkins’ unfounded rant illustrated her xenophobic views on the issue surrounding migrants in general,” SBL committee member Shireen Khan told RT.

“This is further portrayed from the numerous articles that are published by the Sun newspaper that are anti-immigrant and majority of the time simply untrue.”

Khan is confident the ICC, which is best known for investigating atrocities in the Balkans and Africa, will take SBL’s referral very seriously.

“I believe that the ICC will take up this case fully as they have a duty to investigate such matters especially the seriousness of this case, which is further emphasized by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights’ endorsement of our report.

“There is also a strong evidential basis on which SBL have brought this claim. It is quite a sad reality that [the] majority of the time racist abuse is unreported as a crime and secondly is hidden behind the ideas surrounding freedom of speech.”

Khan said the legitimization of anti-immigrant rhetoric under the banner of free speech was a scourge that had become all too common.

She pointed out that Hopkins’ controversial views proved infectious in some quarters, saying they were almost immediately echoed on LBC radio.

“Katie Hopkins’ column was published in the paper but it was then echoed in a viscous, xenophobic and racist tirade on radio, which led to exposure to further parts of society who may be disillusioned in thinking that immigrants are the cause of all destruction our country is facing.

“This has led to some of the most vulnerable people in the world being turned away from the support that they are entitled to under international law. These migrants trying to come to the EU are fleeing persecution, war and death.”

“Immigrants do not deserve to be the scapegoat of this country’s problems and it’s about time we stopped making them it.”

She blasted reactionary anti-immigrant elements within UK politics, arguing they were to blame for creating the political space in which such views could be aired without due criticism.

US turns to UN to hold off ICC case against Israel

The White House is about to turn to the UN to help force a deal between Israel and the Palestinians. The development also reflects deepening pessimism over the prospect of negotiations delivering peace between Israelis and Palestinians.

After years of blocking efforts to pressure Israelis and Palestinians into accepting a lasting two-state solution, the United States is moving toward supporting a UN Security Council resolution that would call for the resumption of political talks to conclude a final peace settlement, according to Western diplomats.

The move follows Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s decisive re-election Tuesday after the incumbent publicly abandoned his commitment to negotiate a Palestinian state — the basis of more than 20 years of US diplomatic efforts — and promised to continue the construction of settlements on occupied territory.

The prospect of direct negotiations appeared to evaporate with Netanyahu’s pre-election declaration that he would never allow the creation of a Palestinian state.

The comment completely reversed the Israeli leader’s previous support for an independent Palestine as part of a permanent peace deal between the two sides.

On Wednesday, the Palestine Liberation Organization’s top diplomat in the United States told Foreign Policy the Palestinians would move forward with plans to use the ICC to try to hold Israel accountable for alleged war crimes during last summer’s war in Gaza.

“The fact that we have a government in Israel publicly opposing a two-state solution just reinforces our position that this conflict must be handled by the international community,” Maen Rashid Areikat said.

The United States would actively seek guarantees from the international community to hold off on ICC activity in exchange for a Security Council resolution outlining international standards for a final peace agreement between the Israelis and Palestinians.

Israel turns off power to Palestinians

The Los Angeles Times reports Israel cut the power to more than 700,000 Palestinians in two of Palestine’s largest urban areas, Nablus and Jenin, for more than 45 minutes “and warned that more outages are coming if Palestinian officials don’t pay millions of dollars in outstanding debt.”

Citing Yiftah Ron-Tal, the director of Israel Electric Corp. (IEC), the Times reports:

“Customers who do not pay electric bills are disconnected; yet here we have an entire population that doesn’t pay while we continue to supply electricity,” he said. “The Palestinian Authority owes the IEC — meaning the paying consumers — nearly 2 billion Israeli shekels [about $500 million]. A year has passed since I said this last and nothing has changed. Starting today, we will begin restricting electricity.”

The irony here, of withholding the months of tax revenue while demanding payment of a debt, on top of occupation policy preventing Palestinians from being self sufficient, is not lost on anyone. More from the Times:

“This is clearly collective punishment against the Palestinian people,” [Ghassan Shakaa, the mayor of Nablus and chairman of the board of the North Electricity Company, which supplies Nablus, Jenin] said. According to Shakaa, the IEC cut power shortly after notifying his company that it owed more than $10 million, and did not wait for an answer or for payment……

Rashid Fadda, who lives in Nablus and works as a technician for the local electric company, said the power cuts came as a surprise.

“We heard the Israeli company threatening to cut power supply to the West Bank but no one really thought it will happen,” he said. “My work depends on electricity and so when the power was cut off, we had to stop work.”

In more winter news, IMEMC reports settlers from the Gilo settlement have “opened its barrages, throwing all excess rain and melted snow water” flooding Aida Refugee camp near Bethlehem.

Israel opened dams near the border of Gaza on Sunday morning, flooding the valley causing hundreds of Palestinians to evacuate their homes.

Source: mondoweiss.net

ICC: Israel guilty of war crimes but will not be prosecuted

International Criminal Court (ICC) lawyers say Israel is guilty of war crimes for the raid on an aid ship bound for Gaza in 2010, but the court’s decision confirms that Israel has a ‘special status’ in regards to international law.

The raid killed nine Turkish activists. They have also decided that the case does not meet their criteria for prosecution, according to court papers seen by Reuters on Wednesday.

On May 31, 2010, the Israeli military forcefully boarded six civilian ships from the “Gaza Freedom Flotilla” that were traveling from Turkey to deliver humanitarian aid and construction materials to the besieged region. The army boarded the ships in international waters in the Mediterranean Sea.

The activists on board say they did not put up a fight, however the Israeli army insists that they were met with resistance – which led to several activists being killed, including eight Turkish nationals and an American of Turkish origin on the Mavi Marmara boat.

The ICC does not have jurisdiction over crimes committed in either Turkey, where most the boats were registered, or Israel, since neither are members of the ICC. However, the Mavi Marmara was registered to the Comoros Islands, which is a member, making the crimes on board eligible for ICC investigation.

“The information available provides a reasonable basis to believe that war crimes under the Court’s jurisdiction have been committed in the context of interception and takeover of the Mavi Marmara by IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) soldiers on 31 May 2010,” read the papers.

But the papers also added that prosecutors had decided the crimes “were not of sufficient gravity to fall under the court’s jurisdiction,” reported Reuters. Their evidence and criteria for making this decision however, remained vague.

“Not having collected evidence itself, the Office’s analysis in this report must therefore not be considered to be the result of an investigation,” the paper read.

However, according to the ICC website, considering individuals guilty of war crimes does make them eligible to be tried under the ICC.

“The mandate of the Court is to try individuals rather than States, and to hold such persons accountable for the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, namely the crime of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and the crime of aggression…”

The Indian Ocean State, another ICC member, referred the raid to court, which obligated the ICC to begin preliminary examinations into the matter, according to their mandate.

“The Prosecutor’s decision marks the first time a State referral by an ICC States Party has ever been rejected by … Prosecutor without even initiating an investigation,” said lawyers Rodney Dixon and Geoffrey Nice in a statement.

“It confirms the view expressed by politicians, civil society organizations, NGOs and commentators from many quarters that Israel has a ‘special status,'” they added.

The report comes the same day that Bulent Yildirim, president of the Turkish NGO Humanitarian Relief Foundation (IHH) – one of the NGOs who organized the flotilla – praised the ICC, expecting that they would announce on Thursday that Israel is guilty of “war crimes.”

The ICC’s final decision is likely to anger other Turkish activists, but also Ankara who accused Israel of mass murder after the IDF attacked the flotilla.

French lawyer files complaint against Israel at ICC

A French lawyer said on Friday that he had filed a complaint on behalf of the Palestinian justice minister at the International Criminal Court (ICC), accusing Israel’s military of having carried out “war crimes” in the Gaza Strip.

More than 800 Palestinians have been killed in Israel’s offensive in Gaza, launched on July 8 in response to Hamas militants firing rockets into the Jewish state.

The complaint targets “war crimes committed by the Israeli army in June and July 2014 in Palestine” in the context of the operation known as Protective Edge, Gilles Devers told reporters.

“Israel, the occupying power, is carrying out a military operation which in principle and form violates the basis of international law,” he said. “Every day new crimes are committed and over 80 percent of the victims are civilians. Children, women, hospitals, UN schools… the Israeli soldiers respect nothing.

“This is a military attack against the Palestinian population.”

The Israeli offensive has left more than 5,200 Palestinians injured, according to emergency services in Gaza, and 33 Israeli soldiers and two civilians have died, too.

The Palestinian Authority, which has non-member observer state status at the United Nations, has not yet signed up to the Hague-based ICC, due to what Devers said were “political” quarrels over the Palestinians’ status.

But according to Devers, the complaint is still valid.

The UN Human Rights Council is launching a probe into Israel’s offensive in Gaza, with rights chief Navi Pillay saying the Jewish state’s military actions could amount to war crimes.

Source: AFP

Palestinians demand ICC war crimes investigation against Israel

Palestinian Foreign Minister Riad al-Malki said there was clear evidence of war crimes by Israel during its offensive in Gaza as he met International Criminal Court prosecutors on Tuesday to push for an investigation.

Malki visited The Hague shortly after Israel and the Palestinian Islamist Hamas movement that dominates Gaza entered a 72-hour truce mediated by Egypt in an effort to secure an extended ceasefire.

Last week, the United Nations launched an inquiry into human rights violations and crimes alleged to have been committed by Israel during its offensive, given the far higher toll of civilian deaths and destruction on the Palestinian side.

“Everything that has happened in the last 28 days is clear evidence of war crimes committed by Israel, amounting to crimes against humanity,” Malki said. “There is no difficulty for us to show or build the case. Evidence is there for people to see and collect. Israel is in clear violation of international law.”

As neither Israel nor the Palestinians are ICC members, the court lacks jurisdiction over Gaza. This could be granted by a U.N. Security Council resolution, but Israel’s main ally, the United States, would probably veto any such proposal.

Malki told reporters that the Palestinian Authority (PA) wanted to give the ICC jurisdiction to investigate alleged crimes by both sides in the Gaza conflagration and that he had discussed a timeline with prosecutors to join the court.

Unless the Palestinians do so, no investigation is possible.

Malki said the PA’s current status at the United Nations, upgraded to “non-member state” from “entity” by a vote of the General Assembly in 2012, qualified it to become an ICC member and a decision on whether to apply could happen “very soon”.

But he pointed to possible complications by saying this could go ahead only with the cooperation of Hamas, which is shunned by the West as a designated terrorist group and is a strong political rival of the Western-backed PA, which governs only in parts of the West Bank not occupied by Israel.

By joining the court, the Palestinian territories would automatically open themselves up to war crimes both committed by adversaries and by themselves within their borders.

“We want really to be assured that if we undertake that decision (for ICC membership), then all Palestinian factions adhere to that decision and know in advance its consequences and ramifications,” Malki said.

“If it (includes) action committed by Palestinian groups (against Israelis), then we are ready to accept that. But nothing compares to the atrocities, the carnage, committed by Israel,” he added, accusing Israel of destroying schools, hospitals and water grids in Gaza during its incursion.

Source: Reuters

British war crimes presented to ICC

iccA devastating 250-page dossier, detailing allegations of beatings, electrocution, mock executions and sexual assault, has been presented to the International Criminal Court, and could result in some of Britain’s leading defence figures facing prosecution for “systematic” war crimes.

General Sir Peter Wall, the head of the British Army; former defence secretary Geoff Hoon; and former defence minister Adam Ingram are among those named in the report, entitled “The Responsibility of UK Officials for War Crimes Involving Systematic Detainee Abuse in Iraq from 2003-2008”.

The damning dossier draws on cases of more than 400 Iraqis, representing “thousands of allegations of mistreatment amounting to war crimes of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment”.

They range from “hooding” prisoners to burning, electric shocks, threats to kill and “cultural and religious humiliation”. Other forms of alleged abuse include sexual assault, mock executions, threats of rape, death, and torture.

The formal complaint to the ICC, lodged yesterday, is the cumulation of several years’ work by Public Interest Lawyers (PIL) and the European Centre for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR). It calls for an investigation into the alleged war crimes, under Article 15 of the Rome Statute.

The dossier, seen by The Independent on Sunday, is the most detailed ever submitted to the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor on war crimes allegedly committed by British forces in Iraq. The court has already acknowledged that there was little doubt that war crimes were committed.

In 2006, it concluded: “There was a reasonable basis to believe that crimes within the jurisdiction of the court had been committed, namely wilful killing and inhuman treatment.” At that time, prosecutors cited the low number of cases – fewer than 20 – as a reason for not mounting an investigation. But, since then, hundreds of other claims have come to light – prompting consideration of the complaint now. It is the start of a process which could result in British politicians and generals being put in the dock on war-crimes charges. Tony Blair meeting troops in Iraq in 2003 Tony Blair meets troops in Iraq in 2003. A dossier alleging “systematic” war crimes by British forces – sent to Iraq by the former Prime Minister – has been presented to the International Criminal Court (PA)

The sheer scale and seriousness of the allegations passes the “gravity” threshold to justify an investigation, according to the complaint. It continues “those who bear the greatest responsibility” for alleged war crimes “include individuals at the highest levels” of the British Army and political system. It concludes the evidence “justifies further investigation” into the criminal responsibility “of senior individuals within the UK military and government”. It adds British military commanders “knew or should have known” that forces under their control “were committing or about to commit war crimes”. And “civilian superiors knew or consciously disregarded information at their disposal, which clearly indicated that UK services personnel were committing war crimes in Iraq”.

The complaint argues that “the pattern of abusive treatment by UK services personnel in Iraq continued over almost six years of military operations”.

A number of top British officials face serious scrutiny, according to Phil Shiner of PIL. He said: “I think we easily meet the threshold for these issues to be looked at, I would be gobsmacked and bitterly disappointed if they don’t look at this.”

Only a handful of courts martial relating to the conduct of British forces in Iraq have been held to date. Just one has resulted in a conviction – Corporal Donald Payne was jailed for a year in 2007 for the inhuman treatment of Iraqi civilians. This one conviction aside, “Nobody has been found guilty of anything of any seriousness at all,” said Mr Shiner.

The complaint being considered by the ICC presents evidence of the “systematic use of brutal violence, that at times resulted in the death of detainees, while in the custody of UK Services Personnel”. And it claims “there is evidence of brutality combined with cruelty and forms of sadism, including sexual abuse, and sexual and religious humiliation”. It points to the widespread use of “hooding”, forcing people to remain in painful “stress positions”, sleep deprivation, noise bombardment and deprivation of food and water. These interrogation techniques were used by British soldiers in Northern Ireland before being banned in 1972. There are “clear patterns” of the banned techniques being used “in a variety of different UK facilities [in Iraq] … from 2003 to 2008,” says the complaint. And evidence “suggests that failures to follow-up on or ensure accountability for ending such practices became a cause of further abuse. The obvious conclusion is that such mistreatment was systematic.”

The report will be publicly released at the Law Society, London, on Tuesday. It comes as the ICC is under mounting pressure to demonstrate a willingness to act against war crimes committed by Western countries – and not solely focus on African nations. Last October, the ICC was criticised by the Ethiopian foreign minister, Tedros Adhanom, who accused it of being “a political instrument targeting Africa and Africans”.

Professor William Schabas, a renowned expert on human rights law, based at Middlesex University, said: “What this application does is throw down the challenge to the court to show there are no double standards.” He added: “There is definitely a case for an investigation by the ICC,” and claimed “there’s no doubt” that war crimes were perpetrated by British forces in Iraq. “People should be worried,” he added.

The complaint amounts to “a prima facie investigation mapped out for the prosecutor”, and is “supported by sophisticated legal argument which adheres to the requirements of the [ICC],” according to Professor Andrew Williams, a law expert at the University of Warwick and author of A Very British Killing: the Death of Baha Mousa. Geoff Hoon at the Basra base camp, Iraq in December 2004 Geoff Hoon at the Basra base camp, Iraq in December 2004. The former Defence Secretary has been named in a dossier alleging widespread abuse of Iraqi prisoners by British soldiers which could see some of Britain’s leading defence figures facing prosecution for “systematic” war crimes (Reuters)

In a statement, an MoD spokesperson said: “These matters are either under thorough investigation or have been dealt with … further action through the ICC is unnecessary when the issues and allegations are already known to the UK Government, action is in hand and the UK courts have already issued judgments.”

The spokesperson added: “We reject the suggestion the UK’s Armed Forces – who operate in line with domestic and international law – have systematically tortured detainees.”

Echoing this today, Foreign Secretary William Hague said there was no need for the ICC to investigate the allegations.

“These allegations are either under investigation already or have been dealt with already in a variety of ways, through the historic abuses system that has been established, through public inquiries, through the UK courts or the European courts,” Mr Hague told Sky News.

“There have been some cases of abuse that have been acknowledged and apologies and compensation have been paid appropriately. But the government has always been clear and the armed forces have been clear that they absolutely reject allegations of systematic abuses by the British armed forces.”

Wolfgang Kaleck, ECCHR secretary general, said: “With the current communication to the ICC we want to move forward the criminal prosecution against those political and military leaders in the UK who bear the most responsibility for systematic torture in Iraq.” He added: “The International Criminal Court in The Hague is the last resort for victims of torture and mistreatment to achieve justice. Double standards in international criminal justice must end. War crimes and other severe violations of human rights must be investigated and prosecuted, regardless of whether they are committed by the most powerful.”

General Sir Peter Wall, Geoff Hoon and Adam Ingram did not respond to requests for comment.

Allegations of torture

Testimonies of hundreds of Iraqis who say they were tortured by British soldiers are being considered by the International Criminal Court in The Hague. Here are a few of the accounts submitted (all names have been withheld).

A man who was beaten in front of his family said: “They made me sit in a kneeling position with my head pushed downwards and then they started to beat me. They beat me on my face, back and stomach.”

Another, who suffered more than 60 punches to his head, stated: “There were many soldiers pushing and throwing me… As each soldier caught me they would punch me.” He described how his son was also abused: “A soldier brought my eight-year-old son into the room. The officer started slapping my son round his face and shouting at him… I was on the floor in a terrible condition and couldn’t move.”

Another man who was hooded stated: “Sand kept coming into the hood. It was extremely uncomfortable and difficult to breathe… We were left to kneel in the sun for hours. If I moved position and bent my head forward at all, a soldier would come and kick me hard.”

A young detainee recalled: “The soldier put his boot on my chest and pulled my trousers down…. I was shouting and was curled up against the wall. Then the soldier pulled me by my legs away from the wall. He turned me over on my stomach. He started rubbing his penis on my back, while the other soldiers watched. Then I felt him ejaculate on my back. I was trying to move away but another soldier came and pressed his foot on my legs.”

Another man said: “Interrogators spent a lot of time insulting my sister and other family members. They threatened to rape my sister and force me to watch and said they would also arrest my old mother and father.”

And an individual held in solitary confinement said: “I was beaten regularly, and was not allowed to go to the toilet or to shower. The psychological suffering during this period is indescribable.”

Rights violations

March 2003 US and British forces invade Iraq.

September Baha Mousa dies in British Army custody in Basra. Inquiry finds death was caused by factors including lack of food and water and stress positions used by British troops.

April 2004 US forces launch assault on the city of Fallujah. It later emerges napalm and depleted uranium were used in the attack. Human rights abuses, including the sexual abuse, rape and killing of prisoners by US forces at Abu Ghraib prison are made public.

May In aftermath of the Battle of Danny Boy in Basra, British troops allegedly abused the human rights of a number of Iraqi nationals – allegations being examined by the Al-Sweady inquiry. British troops deny they murdered any prisoners after they were captured.

September 2007 Seventeen Iraqi civilians killed and 20 injured in Baghdad by troops from the private security firm Blackwater Security Consulting.

2013 Iraq experiences its deadliest year since 2008.

Source: The Independent

Africa forces UN vote over ICC trial for Kenyan president

Uhuru Kenyatta
Uhuru Kenyatta

African nations will Friday launch one of the biggest challenges yet to the International Criminal Court by forcing a UN Security Council vote on suspending the trial of Kenya’s president.

A resolution seeking to defer crimes against humanity charges against President Uhuru Kenyatta and Vice President William Ruto for one year is almost certain to fail through lack of support.

But diplomats and justice experts say the action risks heightening tensions between the ICC and Africa.

The two leaders are accused of masterminding unrest after a 2007 presidential election in 2007 in which at least 1,100 people died. Kenyatta and Ruto took office after an election this year.

Ruto’s trial has started, while that of Kenyatta gets underway February 5 after being delayed three times.

Both have so far cooperated with the ICC. But Kenya has made two written requests to the council to suspend or halt the cases.

Scores of Kenyan victims of the violence have also withdrawn from the ICC case because of what diplomats and experts call “intimidation.”

The resolution to be voted Friday is the most serious bid yet to suspend proceedings.

The Security Council can ask for an ICC case to be deferred for a year under Article 16 of the court’s founding Rome Statute if a trial is considered a threat to international peace.

The resolution has been pressed by Rwanda, a temporary Security Council member, but not an ICC signatory, with strong backing by Ethiopia, another ICC opponent.

It would need at least nine votes on the 15 member council to pass. But with the council’s seven ICC signatories and the United States against them, the resolution has no chance, diplomats said.

The draft resolution says the court case is “distracting and preventing” Kenyatta and Ruto from their duties.

It takes up African Union complaints that the two should be left to handle Kenya’s role in battling Islamist militants in Somalia and the aftermath of September’s Westgate mall attack in Nairobi which left 67 dead.

But western diplomats and activists see a largely political campaign to halt the proceedings and more generally by countries opposed to the ICC to discredit the court.

African leaders frequently complain that the ICC discriminates against their continent.

All eight cases being investigated by the ICC concern Africa. But nearly all were called by the countries involved and Africa’s 34 members make up a key chunk of the court’s 122 signatories.

“The Africans have now reached a stage where they are talking about this is as a test of whether you are in favour of Africa or against Africa,” said one UN diplomat who has taken part in the often highly emotive talks on the resolution.

This was “deeply resented” by countries who oppose the resolution, added the diplomat, who highlighted how the Security Council voted this week to increase an African force in Somalia which is almost entirely paid for by the European Union.

“This is turning into the biggest challenge to the court since it was set up,” added a second council diplomat.

“Undoubtedly, the pressure exerted by Kenya, by Rwanda, by Ethiopia increases strain on the court as it tries to strengthen its impact,” commented Richard Dicker, justice specialist with the Human Rights Watch group.

He said part of the motivation for the vote was to “ratchet up pressure” ahead of an assembly of the Rome Statute member countries in The Hague starting next Wednesday.

The assembly is to discuss possible measures such as allowing defendants to take part by video-conference and to give courts’ extra leeway to allow absences, which could help Kenyatta and Ruto.

Some African leaders have agitated for an African withdrawal from the ICC.

“I don’t think this would lead to a mass walkout, but if this vote goes ahead the atmosphere will be so bad at the assembly it is going to make it so much more difficult to reach agreement on things that could make a difference,” said the UN diplomat.

“And it would increase the likelihood that Kenyatta will not cooperate with the court,” the official added. – AFP

Kenya pushing for AU-split from ICC

iccAfrican leaders will debate the continent’s “relationship” with the International Criminal Court at a special summit on October 11, officials said Friday, amid growing opposition to the tribunal.

The 54-member African Union has accused The Hague-based ICC of singling out Africans for prosecution and has previously called for the court to drop crimes against humanity trials of Kenya’s leadership.

“They will discuss African relationship with ICC,” the deputy head of the AU’s executive branch, Erastus Mwencha, himself a Kenyan, told AFP.

Diplomats say member states of the court, which was founded primarily to try genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity, are expected to discuss a possible united pullout from the ICC.

African countries account for 34 of the 122 parties to have ratified the Rome Statute, the court’s founding treaty, which took effect on July 1, 2002.

Mwencha said the cases of Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta and his deputy William Ruto were not specifically earmarked for discussion, saying only that the “agenda is very broad.”

Kenyatta and Ruto, as well as former radio boss Joshua Arap Sang, face crimes against humanity charges for their alleged roles in orchestrating ethnic violence after disputed 2007 elections. The violence left at least 1 100 dead and more than 600 000 homeless.

Last month, Kenyan lawmakers voted on a motion to withdraw recognition of the court’s jurisdiction.

Any move by the AU to leave the ICC’s Rome Statute will have no effect on the current trials, and pulling out is a lengthy process that must be done by nations on an individual basis.

The pan-African bloc in May accused the ICC of “hunting” Africans, and has requested that the cases against Kenyatta and Ruto be transferred to Kenya.

The trial of Ruto and Sang is already under way, and Kenyatta’s trial is set to begin in November. The three have pledged their cooperation with the court and maintain their innocence.

The ICC maintains that it is not targeting Africa as a continent, pointing out that many of the cases under investigation in Africa were referred to the court by the countries themselves.

It could lead to a breakdown in relations between the court and African leaders. Tensions between the African Union (AU) and the court (ICC) are nothing new, but the meeting in Addis Ababa, the Ethiopean capital, has the potential to irretrievably damage relations between them.

 

“The Kenyans were criss-crossing Africa in search of support for their cause even before their parliament voted to withdraw from the ICC,” said one AU diplomat. “A complete walkout by signatories is certainly a possibility – but other requests are also possible.”

Ruto and Kenyatta have been seen as stalwarts in the fight against Islamic extremism and have argued that their absence for months on end, particularly in the case of Mr Kenyatta, is not just dangerous but also untenable.

It is not just Kenya that is promoting the anti-ICC agenda and pointing out that all eight cases it is investigating are in Africa.

Sudanese president Omar al-Bashir, wanted for genocide and crimes against humanity in Darfur, visited Kenya last month but was not arrested, despite an ICC request. He says the charges are “exaggerated” and describes the ICC as part of a “western plot” against him.

Last week, Ivory Coast’s government decided not to transfer former first lady Simone Gbagbo to join her husband in The Hague on charges of crimes against humanity in connection with the 2010 presidential election, and said it would try her at home.

Rwanda’s ambassador to the African Union, Joseph Nsengimana, observed: “It is not only the case of Kenya. We have seen international justice become more and more a political matter.”

President Jacob Zuma said it was the impression that the ICC was being “unreasonable” – that led directly to the Addis Ababa summit on October 13th.

Countries that support the court and its work, notably Botswana, are likely to do so again. Those who oppose it are hoping it will be “a game-changer”, most immediately perhaps in the case against Mr Kenyatta. – Sapa/AFP/Irish Times