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.

Tony Blair could face war crimes charges

Tony Blair could face war crimes charges as a result of the Iraq war inquiry report, the House of Lords has been told.

Lord Dykes of Harrow Weald, a Liberal Democrat peer, claimed that the publication of the inquiry by Sir John Chilcot was being delayed “to prolong the agony” of the former Labour Prime Minister.

Lord Hurd – who as Douglas Hurd was Conservative foreign secretary from 1989 to 1995 – said the delay was now “becoming a scandal”.

Lord Wallace of Saltaire, a Government minister, disclosed for the first time that talks over the publication of the gist of conversations between Mr Blair and George W Bush, the former US president, were now completed.

These talks have held up the publication of the report. But he said that if the report is not published by the end of February, it will be delayed until after the general election.

Speaking in the House of Lords, Lord Dykes – who as Hugh Dykes was a Tory MP from 1979 to 1997 – asked: “Is not this continuing delay an utter and total disgrace and so much time has elapsed.

“Is my noble friend aware that more and more people think it is some kind of attempt to prolong the agony of Mr Blair facing possible war crimes charges?”

Lord Hurd added: “This has dragged on beyond the questions of mere negligence and forgiveable delay – it is becoming a scandal.

“This is not something which is of trivial importance, it is something which a large number of people in this country look anxiously for truth.”

Source: The Telegraph

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.

Elderly die of starvation in Ukraine

Sixteen elderly people died from starvation in September in Donetsk. The people could not eat anything as they were afraid to go out of basements, where they were hiding from bombs, the head of Fair Aid Charity Fund, Doctor Elizaveta Glinka said.

“There are many elderly and lonely individuals, who experience terrible problems, living in cold apartments, basements and bomb shelters. The strong shortage of medicines and the lack of medical supervision require the creation of a hospice for those who need assistance. In September, 16 elderly people died from starvation in the center of the city of Donetsk. They were afraid to leave their shelters, so they could not make any food for themsevles,” she said on Tuesday at a meeting of the Human Rights Council under the President of the Russian Federation.

“We [the Russians] are the nation that survived the war and its terrible consequences. We shared bread even with prisoners of war. I believe that we can not ignore the weak in this situation – the elderly and people with disabilities. We decided to support the creation of the hospice in Donetsk,” she said, RIA Novosti reports.

Elizaveta Glinka, known as Dr. Liza, has repeatedly visited the south-east of Ukraine with humanitarian missions to deliver medicines and medical instruments, as well as to evacuate sick children from the combat zone. In early August, Glinka brought nine seriously ill children from the east of Ukraine to Moscow. Later, she returned from Donetsk with three more children.

Source: Pravda

International investigation called after mass graves found in Ukraine

The Russian Foreign Ministry, legislators and members of non-governmental and human rights organizations have demanded an international investigation into mass graves in Ukraine.

Russia’s Public Chamber has adopted a statement with a call to the United Nations, the Council of Europe and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to investigate mass graves in Ukraine’s Donetsk Region.

The graves were found on Ukrainian National Guard positions in eastern Ukraine. Forensic experts examined one of them to arrive at the conclusion that the victims had been shot in the head at a point-blank range. Four bodies have been examined so far.

“The discovered graves are evidence of outrageous war crimes and require investigation under international control,” runs the statement read out by the Civic Chamber’s deputy secretary Sergey Ordzhonikidze.

“The Public Chamber is asking the United Nations, the OSCE and other agencies to create an independent panel of inquiry to investigate the affair,” Ordzhonikidze said, adding that “a military tribunal for war crimes in Ukraine must be the end goal.”

On September 23 there were reports local militias discovered several mass graves near the Kommunar coalmine near Donetsk. Earlier the territory was under the control of the Ukrainian army and the National Guard’s battalion Aidar.

The whole territory will be combed. Militias have already found several other graves, which are kept intact for the time being.

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

HRW, apologists for murder

By Norman Finkelstein.

It takes considerable talent to describe Hamas’s firing of primitive “rockets” that to date have indirectly killed one person (she died of a heart attack) as a “war crime,” while describing Israel’s killing to date of 120 Palestinians, overwhelmingly civilians and innocent children, and its systematic targeting of civilian infrastructure, as mere “collective punishment.”

But it’s what one has come to expect from Human Rights Watch. In 2008 HRW issued a report entitled Flooding South Lebanon: Israel’s use of cluster munitions in Lebanon in July and August 2006. The report found that Israel dropped as many as 4.6 million cluster submunitions on south Lebanon during the 2006 war. It was – in HRW’s words – “the most extensive use of cluster munitions anywhere in the world since the 1991 Gulf war,” while relative to the size of the targeted area the density of the attack was historically unprecedented. Some 90 percent of these cluster munitions were dropped during the final three days “when Israel knew a settlement was imminent” (HRW), the U.N. ceasefire resolution having already been passed but not yet gone into effect. But, although finding that Israel committed “extensive violations” of the laws of war, HRW did not go beyond stating that Israel’s massive resort to cluster munitions was “in some locations possibly a war crime,” even as the evidence HRW itself assembled conclusively showed that Israel was targeting civilian population centers.

HRW now says that targeting the civilian homes of Hamas militants constitutes mere collective punishment. So, let’s see. Israel prides itself on having a citizen army. Virtually every civilian dwelling in Israel contains a family member who is either in the army or the reserves. If Hamas had precision missiles, issued an official warning that henceforth it would be targeting every civilian dwelling in Israel, and then proceeded to do just that, would HRW call it mere “collective punishment”?

Anglican Church supports war crimes… again

tonyiraqNot only is Middle East “Peace Envoy”, Catholic convert and Butcher of Baghdad, Tony Blair gunning for another overthrow and mass destruction in Syria, he has recruited the son of an Archbishop to help him.

Not any old Archbishop either. Blair’s latest recruit is son of Justin Welby, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Primate of All England, who heads both the Church of England and the eighty million member Anglican Communion worldwide.

Blair has given Peter Welby “a key role” in his mega-funded Faith Foundation as “a researcher for a new website … that will analyse the role of religion in conflicts around the world.” Perhaps enjoining, as George W. Bush put it, a “Crusade” against majority Muslim countries might be an angle worth pursuing.

Twenty three year old Welby is clearly a faithful Blairite, having already hawkishly warned of President Putin’s “annexation” of the Crimea and that the British Government: “would be wise to consider reversing some defence cuts …” As a “researcher” he clearly has a bit to learn, since the Crimean referendum with a 83.1% turn out and near 97% vote to cede to Russia had clearly passed him by.

He will surely fit well in his new post since the above exhibits a splendidly Blair-type mindset and abandonment scrutiny of facts – like weapons of mass destruction that can be unleashed “in forty five minutes.”

However, it is with Syria that he follows Blair’s line to the letter. The “Peace Envoy” embraces wars of aggression as a fish takes to proverbial water – courageously always traveling with an army of armed protection officers funded by the un-consulted British tax payer.

Blair’s determination to do for Syria what he did for Iraq is a litany, but here are a random four: Legality ditched again, he declared of President Assad: “He’s got to go …” (CBS 19th April 2012.)

“We’ve got to look very carefully to what more we can do to ratchet up the pressure on Assad … “ (BBC “Today” Programme, 17th September 2012.)

There would be: “ ‘catastrophic consequences’ if the West fails to arm Syrian rebels to defeat the regime of President Bashar al-Assad.” (Daily Telegraph 19th June 2013.) Blair either missed, or is cheering on, the unspeakable atrocities being committed by the (Western paid) foreign insurgents and terrorist groups.

As this was being written he popped up on the BBC’s “Today” Programme again, loftily attempting to justify the catastrophes of Afghanistan and Iraq in his “I’d do it all again” mode and saying of Syria that the strong opposition of the British people (he didn’t mention the “No” vote in Parliament) did not “invalidate” the need for action. As Stop the War put it: “We should invade Syria whether the British public want it or not.”

The cynic might ponder on whether, for a man for whom precious human lives lost in orders of magnitude are clearly very cheap indeed, there is an element of pay-back involved.

At the beginning of November 2001, three weeks after the invasion of Afghanistan, Blair went to visit President Assad: “the first ever visit to Damascus by a British leader, to enlist support for the bombing campaign. Instead he was subjected to a recital of … Western failures in the Middle East.”

Rather than gather support for the bombing, he “was forced to listen as the Syrian President heaped criticism on the killing of Afghan civilians.”

“We cannot accept what we see on television, the killing of innocent civilians, hundreds now dying every day”, Assad told Blair, adding that: “We are always against war” – and moreover, the West also placed little value on Arab lives.

Whatever Blair’s motives, Peter Welby is firmly on side. On 31st March he wrote, in an article for the Faith Foundation’s website: “Last week I went to a presentation by Emile Hokayem hosted by the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London.” In a “fascinating” talk: “Hokayem argued that engagement must be with [jihadist] rebels more favourable to Western interests …”

In a ramble about the complexities of terrorist groups in Iraq and their travels between Iraq and Syria, there is no mention that they were never there before in secular Iraq and Syria and, as mentioned previously, literally came in with Bush and Blair’s tanks, in their illegal invasion, which also left all borders wide open for all comers.

Hokayem, writes Welby unquestioningly, thought Assad’s victory “improbable”, but his money is basically on the thugs and: “peace is unlikely until one group is sufficiently dominant to take the others with it.”

No mention of countless beheadings, including children, and of the numerous, unspeakable medieval atrocities meted out by these demonic, illegal immigrants.

In fact, even the Washington Post is of the view that President Assad’s tide is turning and that: “He is in a stronger position than ever before to quell the rebellion” and indeed, to win a third term in the upcoming elections.

One man is incandescent about the appointment of Peter Welby and has written to his father in no uncertain terms.

Nicholas Wood is author of “War Crime or Just War? The Case Against Blair”, a meticulous legal compilation of just that. Wood, is also Secretary of the Blair War Crimes Foundation. He writes:

The Archbishop of Canterbury.
Canterbury Cathedral

Dear Sir,

I enclose my book on Blair, and also a letter to the Prime Minister on his criminality. Though quite why I bother to pay the postage I don’t know.

I cannot comprehend that you are someone who is supposed to think every day of moral values but not realise that Blair is a very dangerous psychopath, who, as well as causing untold devastation and misery in Iraq, wishes to extend that violence into Syria and Iran.

If you read page 570 of his autobiography you might possibly see what I mean.

Referring to Blair’s advisory position to various heads of State, including Uzbekistan, of which former Ambassador Craig Murray blew the whistle on mind numbing torture, he states:

Your son will be benefiting, indirectly, of course, from money obtained from despots who boil their victims. This, under the guise of piety.

I was brought up as a child, a long time ago, to think of Thomas A Becket as a Saint, who resisted the power of a military state, and paid the price with his life. I cannot see you doing that.

I also was brought up to worship the medieval beauty of Canterbury, it’s stones and it’s stained glass. If stones could weep, they would be weeping now.

Yours faithfully, Nicholas Wood, MA.

Page 570 of Blair’s autobiography to which Wood refers contains a phrase which should surely grab the attention of any psychiatrist:

I had a vision for Britain. All the way I had believed I could and would persuade the country it was the right choice, the modern way, bigger than Iraq, bigger than the American Alliance, bigger than any one thing; a complete vision of where we should be in the early twenty first century; about how we finally overcome the greatness of our history to discover the full potential of our future.

“Bigger than Iraq”? The nearing two million deaths since 2003? The five million orphans, million widows. five million displaced? On to Syria, Iran?

Nicholas Wood says in succinct understatement:

I suggest that such a vision should be restrained before it is emulated and allowed free rein.

Felicity Arbuthnot is a journalist with special knowledge of Iraq. Author, with Nikki van der Gaag, of Baghdad in the Great City series for World Almanac books, she has also been Senior Researcher for two Award winning documentaries on Iraq

Charles Taylor’s victims hail war crimes verdict

Charles Taylor in 1990
Charles Taylor in 1990

Victims of the bloody regime of Liberian warlord Charles Taylor spoke of their relief after his 50-year jail term for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Sierra Leone was upheld by an international court on Thursday.

The final verdict handed down by the UN-backed Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) draws a line under a seven-year trial of the 65-year-old former Liberian president, sentenced in May last year for “some of the most heinous crimes in human history”.

“As a government, we believe that justice has been done and impunity is over,” Sierra Leone government spokesman Abdulai Bayraytay told AFP.

“The message for sitting heads of state not only in Africa but beyond is that when you are in power you must exercise it judiciously, have respect for the rule of law and human rights and uphold the dignity of others.”

Around 100 people, including human rights activists and survivors of the Sierra Leone civil war, watched a live broadcast of the ruling in the capital Freetown.

For Sullay Turay, who lost a hand and a foot to Taylor-backed rebels, the outcome “showed that no matter what you do, justice will finally catch up with you and this is what has happened in Taylor’s case.”

The former warlord, who was jailed initially for 50 years for arming rebels during Sierra Leone’s brutal 1990s civil war, is likely to spend the rest of his life behind bars, possibly in a British jail.

He sparked a 13-year civil war in his own country when he led a rebellion in 1989 to oust President Samuel Doe which deteriorated into one of Africa’s bloodiest conflicts.

His National Patriotic Front of Liberia (NPFL) earned a reputation for extreme violence, conscripting child soldiers and terrorising citizens of certain ethnic groups.

After taking Monrovia, Taylor was elected president in 1997, but violence again erupted in 1999 when another rebellion started and he lost control of much of the country, fleeing in 2003 to Nigeria.

The conflicts resulted in 270,000 deaths, with many civilians displaced and several thousand becoming victims of atrocities, according to the United Nations.

As Liberia’s president from 1997 to 2003, Taylor supported Revolutionary United Front rebels in neighbouring Sierra Leone by supplying them with guns and ammunition as they waged a campaign of terror during a civil war that claimed 120,000 lives between 1991 and 2002.

He was finally arrested and transferred to The Hague in 2006, where he was convicted in 2012 of aiding and abetting the rebels during the conflict, known for its mutilations, drugged child soldiers and sex slaves, trial judges found.

“Full justice has now been done and the victims should move on with their lives. The violations they suffered have been addressed through the judicial process,” said Ibrahim Tommy, chairman of the Centre for Accountability and the Rule of Law campaign group.

“The government now should work to strengthen the justice system and work for the socio-economic prosperity of the victims.”

Some victims of the conflict remain bitter and voiced frustration that Taylor had not received the 80-year sentence requested by the prosecution.

“Let Taylor rot in jail. I only wish he would have served his sentence in an African prison to suffer the more,” said Freetown taxi driver Andrew Lebbie.

But there was also a note of reconciliation among the crowd gathered for the ruling in Freetown.

“Forgiveness is all I would ask for. The court should have tempered justice with mercy,” said vicar Sam Fergusson.

But Taylor has never been charged for his role in Liberia’s bloody history, only that in neighbouring Sierra Leone. – AFP

Charles Taylor to hear Sierra Leone appeal verdict

Charles Taylor during his trial at The Hague
Charles Taylor during his trial at The Hague

Former Liberian President Charles Taylor will hear Thursday whether appeals judges uphold or overturn his landmark conviction and 50-year sentence for aiding murderous rebels in Sierra Leone’s civil war.

Taylor, 65, became the first former head of state convicted by an international war crimes court since World War II when the Special Court for Sierra Leone found him guilty on April 26, 2012, of 11 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity including terrorism, murder, rape and using child soldiers.

Judges said he provided crucial aid to rebels and helped plan attacks in return for “blood diamonds” mined by slave laborers in Sierra Leone and political influence in the volatile West African region. His conviction was hailed as ushering in a new era of accountability for heads of state.

“The trial and judgment of Charles Taylor sets out a clear marker that even those at the highest levels of power can be held to account,” Elise Keppler, associate international justice director at Human Rights Watch said in a statement. “The Taylor trial, and the Sierra Leone Special Court’s work overall, have made a major contribution to justice for brutal crimes committed during Sierra Leone’s conflict.”

About 50,000 people died in the 11-year civil war that ended in 2002. Thousands more were left mutilated in a conflict that became known for the extreme cruelty of rival rebel groups who gained international notoriety for hacking off the limbs of their victims and carving their groups’ initials into opponents. The rebels developed gruesome terms for the mutilations that became their chilling trademark: They would offer their victims the choice of “long sleeves” or “short sleeves” – having their hands hacked off or their arms sliced off above the elbow.

Taylor was convicted not only of aiding and abetting Sierra Leone rebels from Liberia, but also for actually planning some of the attacks carried out by Sierra Leone rebel groups, the Revolutionary United Front and the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council.

It isn’t clear if the Sierra Leone court’s appeal panel will take into account a February appeals judgment by the U.N. Yugoslav war crimes tribunal that acquitted the former chief of staff of the Yugoslav National Army, Gen. Momcilo Perisic, of aiding forces fighting in a neighboring country. Perisic was freed after appeals judges said it hadn’t been proven that he sent supplies to Bosnian Serb forces with the “specific intent” that they be used to commit atrocities.

The ruling was seen as raising the bar on the level of proof needed to uphold such aiding and abetting charges, though the Sierra Leone court isn’t bound to follow in the Yugoslav tribunal’s footsteps.

Taylor’s lawyers say he should be acquitted on all counts. Prosecutors asked appeals judges to rule that he was even more closely involved in the crimes in Sierra Leone than was laid out in his original conviction and urged judges to increase Taylor’s sentence to 80 years, saying the 50-year sentence wasn’t “reflective of the inherent gravity of the totality of his criminal conduct and overall culpability.”

If Taylor’s sentence is upheld, he will be transferred to Britain, which has agreed to provide a cell for him.

Taylor’s trial was moved from the Special Court of Sierra Leone’s headquarters in the capital, Freetown, to the Netherlands because of fears it could destabilize the West African region if held in Sierra Leone.

The Taylor appeals ruling will be the final judgment at the court, which indicted 13 of the main architects of the atrocities in Sierra Leone. Two died before trial and one more remains unaccounted for and possibly dead. Another died before hearing a verdict and all the others were tried and convicted.

The court’s trial chamber in Freetown will be converted to house Sierra Leone’s Supreme Court in the future. Another part of the court is being turned into a peace museum and its detention facility has been put to use as a prison by local authorities. – AP

South African Muslims want Obama arrested for war crimes

South African Muslims
South African Muslims

The Muslim Lawyers Association (MLA) intends taking the NPA to court for refusing to arrest US President Barack Obama on his South African visit later this month.

“We will ask the court to review the decision neither to investigate or prosecute and to order them to commence a full investigation in terms of the Rome Statute,” MLA attorney Yousha Tayob said.

The MLA said it submitted a complaint to the national director of public prosecutions and the SA Police Service, calling for Obama to be “investigated, charged, arrested, and tried in a South African court for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide”.

The MLA cited the Obama administration’s drone programme as the reason for its action.

The association said the complaint was made in terms of international customary law, as well as the implementation of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, Act 2002 (the ICC Act).

“The [drone] programme is responsible for extra-judicial killings of both innocent civilians as well as US citizens abroad. The drone strike policy has continued unabated with total disregard for territorial sovereignty and this is cited as the primary reason that Obama should be investigated and tried for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide,” the MLA said.

A drone is an unmanned aerial vehicle. In a recent speech Obama said the US used drones to target people it considered a threat to its national security when other measures were not possible.

The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) confirmed receiving the MLA’s documents.

Tayob said the MLA received a letter of reply from the state attorney’s office on Wednesday.

“They have decided they are not commencing an investigation,” said Tayob.

The NPA was also not going to arrest or secure Obama’s attendance in a court room.

Tayob said the application for a review would be made next week, probably in the High Court in Pretoria.

The Media Review Network (MRN) was also opposed to Obama’s visit. Executive director Iqbal Jassat said the MRN planned a series of protests over Obama’s visits, over the US government’s use of drones, its failure to stop the “occupation of Muslim countries”, and its not shutting down the Guantanamo Bay detention centre as promised.

The MRN supports the MLA’s planned legal action.

“We have rallied behind these actions. Levels of pressure developed by civil society would force the US government to review the purpose of this visit and possibly lead to the cancellation,” said Jassat.

A row is reportedly also brewing over plans by the University of Johannesburg to award Obama an honorary degree.

According to a report in the Sunday Independent, students were split on this.

But deputy vice chancellor Tinyiko Maluleke said the process was a lengthy one, requiring high levels of consultation and agreement, and had not been finalised.

The process of nominating someone for an honorary degree began with discussions in the honorary degrees committee, where candidates had to receive 100 percent support.

From there, the nomination went to the senate, which consisted of senior academics and representatives of the Students’ Representative Committee. After that it, went to the council, which also consisted of student representatives.

At each stage, a certain amount of support was required.

“So when people say stuff has not been consulted or students have not been included, it’s simply not true. It’s a very lengthy process,” said Maluleke.

The same process applied to all nominees. – Sapa

Sierra Leone rebels helped by Charles Taylor ‘to kill, rape and mutilate thousands’

Charles Taylor during his trial at The Hague

Sierra Leone rebels depended on Charles Taylor’s logistics to kill, rape and mutilate thousands during the west African nation’s savage civil war, prosecutors said Wednesday at the end of the Liberian ex-president’s appeal.

The Revolutionary United Front “relied on Taylor’s logistical assistance”, Nicholas Koumjian told the west African nation’s UN-backed special court, where the former warlord is appealing a 50-year prison sentence.

“Without this support, thousands would not have been killed, would not have been amputated, would not have been taken as sex slaves,” he told the second and final day of the appeals hearing at the court’s headquarters in Leidschendam just outside The Hague.

Dressed in a grey suit, white shirt and dark tie, with rimless round glasses perched on his nose, Taylor frowned often as he listened intently to the prosecution’s arguments.

The former strongman who was given an opportunity to address judges at the end of the hearing and told the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) that he was “very appreciative of the handling of the proceedings so far”.

“I have the belief that the right thing will be done with the grace of Almighty God,” said Taylor, who once famously compared himself to Jesus.

The SCSL in April last year convicted Taylor, 64, of aiding and abetting the RUF and its allies who waged a terror campaign during a civil war that claimed 120,000 lives between 1991 and 2001.

His sentence in May for “some of the most heinous crimes in human history” was widely welcomed around the world and was the first handed down by an international court against a former head of state since the Nazi trials at Nuremberg in 1946.

As neighbouring Liberia’s president from 1997 to 2003, Taylor gave rebels guns and ammunition in their fight against Freetown during the conflict, know for its mutilations, drugged child soldiers and sex slaves, trial judges found.

In return, Taylor was paid in “blood diamonds” mined by slave labour in areas kept under the countrol of ruthless Sierra Leonean rebels.

Taylor’s defence again argued on Wednesday that there was no evidence linking him to crimes committed by Sierra Leone’s brutal rebel forces, nor did he provide logistics, guns and ammunition.

“There was no support from Charles Taylor,” said one of his lawyers, Christopher Gosnell.

The defence has argued that trial judges made legal mistakes in their findings against Taylor and are asking appeals judges to reverse the conviction and quash the sentence.

Prosecutors argued Taylor’s sentence was too light and asked, on appeal, for 80 years, with Koumjian telling judges: “Charles Taylor knew about these crimes.”

“He knew what was happening and how the RUF operated.”

Taylor’s trial, which ended in March 2011, saw a number of high-profile witnesses testify including British supermodel Naomi Campbell, who told the court she received a gift of “dirty diamonds”, said to be from the flamboyant Taylor.

Appeals judges are expected to have a decision by September at the earliest, with the Liberian ex-president remaining behind bars at the UN’s detention unit in The Hague until appeals proceedings are finalised.

If his appeal fails, Taylor will serve his sentence in a British jail.

Were Afrikaners ‘dirty African peasants’?

by Dan Roodt

Pauline Morris in Boer women and children died ‘due to backwardness wants to “open up a critical debate on the realities of the Boer War concentration camps”, as part of the wider “de-mythologising” of South African history.

I can only say: “Bring it on!” Let us open the archives and reread the tens of thousands of letters and other evidence that have been gathering dust for over a hundred years. In fact, I recently visited the archives in Pretoria and was the first person ever to peruse some of the files related to the barbaric destruction inflicted by Britain on each and every farm and household in the Transvaal and especially the Free State. Some, but not all, victims received derisory compensation for their losses after the war.

To some extent, dr. Elma Ross has already revealed the true nature of the camps by describing her own family history, characterising the British as “terrorists”. Britain was a signatory to the Hague Convention of 1899, a forerunner of the Geneva Conventions prohibiting war and atrocities upon civilians. The Hague Convention entered into force on September 4, 1900, just in time to apply to the form of “total war” that Kitchener and Roberts waged upon the entire Boer population during the second, non-conventional phase of the war.

There can be no doubt that, were it not for the policy of “reconciliation between the two white races” followed after the war, culminating in Union in 1910, Britain would have been prosecuted for war crimes under the Hague Convention, just like Germany was after World War II. Some Afrikaner groups believe that Britain could still be prosecuted even today. At the very least Britain should be made to acknowledge its war crimes at the European level, similar to demands by former French President Chirac that Turkey should “recognise its past” and the Armenian genocide (1915-23) before being able to join the EU.

Whatever the sophistries thought up these days by British historians and their colleagues at jingoist institutions like the University of Cape Town where Elizabeth van Heyningen is apparently a professor of history, it cannot be denied that the camps formed part of a military operation. That they were partly successful in breaking Boer resolve to defend their sovereignty, is also widely acknowledged.

The jingoist case for Afrikaner women and children “dying due to ignorance and lack of hygiene” seems to rest upon the wider English belief (or myth?) that pioneer Afrikaners in the nineteenth century were not, as Prof. Elizabeth van Heyningen puts it in one of her journal articles, “civilised Europeans” but “dirty African peasants”.

That these “dirty African peasants” were literate enough to write letters and diaries about their war and concentration camp experiences and that their “civilised” British captors found it necessary to destroy their pianos and other musical instruments while burning down their homes, seem to contradict many a confident English stereotype.

Perhaps we should also enquire about the hygienic habits of Johannesburg’s much-admired uitlander population in the 1890s when the outbreak of syphilis relating to widespread prostitution presented a major public health problem to Paul Kruger’s Republican government.