Courting Brutal Tyrants

There are so many corrupt regimes and dictators willing to slaughter their own people in the world that it merits taking a look at the primary legal forum that was created in 2002 – as part of the United Nations – to deal with such horrors: the International Criminal Court. Headquartered in Peace Palace in The Hague (above), the ICC “is a permanent tribunal to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression (although it cannot, until at least 2017, exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression).” Wikipedia.

But there is a catch… actually a series of catches that make one question the effectiveness of this court, which seems only to focus on developing countries, is relegated to post-2002 acts, has indicted only 28 individuals in a slow process such that 22 of those cases are still in process, does not have global support (see below) and the Security Council has approval rights over the prosecutions. In fact, of the five veto-empowered Council members, Russia China and the U.S. have refused to be subjected to the jurisdiction of the ICC.

“The [enabling statute obliges signatory] states to refrain from ‘acts which would defeat the object and purpose’ of the treaty until they declare they do not intend to become a party to the treaty. Three of these states—Israel, Sudan and the United States—have informed the UN Secretary General that they no longer intend to become states parties and, as such, have no legal obligations arising from their former representatives’ signature of the Statute. 41 United Nations member states have neither signed nor ratified or acceded to the Rome Statute; some of them, including China and India, are critical of the Court. The Palestinian National Authority, which neither is nor represents a United Nations member state, has formally accepted the jurisdiction of the Court. On 3 April 2012, the ICC Prosecutor declared himself unable to determine that Palestine is a ‘state’ for the purposes of the Rome Statute.” Wikipedia.

Those murderous leaders who cling to power and have well-positioned allies on the Security Council, particularly those with veto power, have little to fear from ICC prosecutors. “Yemen’s autocratic leader was clinging to power, turning his security forces’ guns on unarmed protesters. Hundreds were left dead, and many more were maimed… But when Yemen’s Nobel laureate, Tawakkol Karman, traveled to The Hague to ask prosecutors to investigate, she was told the court would first need the approval of the United Nations Security Council. That never happened, and today the former president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, is living comfortably in Yemen’s capital, still wielding influence… Now, as the world confronts increasing evidence of atrocities on a much vaster scale in Syria as President Bashar al-Assad’s government battles a growing rebellion, there are signs that Mr. Assad is likely to evade prosecution, much as Mr. Saleh has.” New York Times, July 7^th.

Leaders who have no such allies – frequently not a part of the oil-supply chain – are the most obvious targets who face the ICC’s wrath. And even in the rare oil-belt efforts, the investigations and prosecutions have pretty much followed leaders who have committed or supported direct attacks on Western powers, like Libyan leader Muammar Kaddafi, whose support of terrorists is best remembered in the destruction of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988. Kaddafi was killed, however, before he could be prosecuted. Accused of genocide, Bosnian Serb General Ratko Mladic is currently being tried for war crimes. African warlord and former Liberian President Charles Taylor was convicted recently of war crimes committed in Liberia and in nearby Sierra Leone. “A warlord during his country’s civil war in the 1990’s, Mr. Taylor became president after the war ended. His forces dragooned children into combat, killed thousands of civilians and made the hacking off of limbs their signature.” NY Times, May 31^st.

You’d think that for a pile of murdering or brutalizing miscreants, there would be lots of long sentences imposed. Not exactly. “The International Criminal Court in The Hague sentenced a Congolese warlord to 14 years in prison for using child soldiers in his rebel army in 2002 and 2003... The sentence was the first imposed by the court in its history. Thomas Lubanga, a former psychologist turned warlord, was found guilty in March of ‘widespread’ use of girls and boys under the age of 15, recruiting them in his militia and sending them to kill and terrorize villagers in the Ituri region of Congo.” NY Times, July 10^th. The first imposed????

So it appears that there are no remedies against so many of such brutal murderers with friends in high places and almost no serious punishment meted out for those still in the system. The ICC was intended to supplant the ability of tyrants to escape local courts, laced with cronyism and corruption, presenting an international forum as a powerful alternative. It just seems that the cronyism and corruption that protects these monsters is simply at a higher level these days… and we are most definitely part of the problem.

I’m Peter Dekom, and the brutality of global tyrants really needs a clear perception that sooner or later such evil-doers will be prosecuted by an angry world.