Wednesday, 16 April 2003

Civil society groups launch war crimes probe
By Ushani Agalawatta
Inter Press Service

Alfred A. Araya Jr:
Central Mindanao delegation calls for halt in military offensives
Emad Makay:
Activists stunned by US debt-forgiveness call for Iraq
IPS North America Team:
Fight against war continues
Ambassador Howard Q. Dee :
Transforming the structures of war into instruments for peace


By Bill Huang
The April Fools


By Bill Huang
A fate worse than debt?


By Paulynn P. Sicam
A separate reality


By Bill Huang
A Bridge Too Far
Global Day of Protest Against US Occupation of Iraq
Uphold transparency and accountability -- CBCP
Government should immediately take over Maynilad
Philippine absentee voting more cumbersome and costs more than that adopted by rich countries
Declaration of state of lawless violence in Davao may lead to more violations to human rights!
How many more lives of peace and human rights advocates need to be sacrificed until peace reigns in Mindanao?
HK group says selective right to vote is no right at all
Bush's next target: Sulu, not Syria
ISSUED IN MANILA BY GAIA AND GREENPEACE EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE UNTIL 15 APRIL 2003
Arroyo, Ople are not speaking for
Filipinos in endorsing US rule over Iraq
Pinoys, Asians start Global Day of Protests
Take over Meralco now-IBON
POWER proposes immediate cash refund for Meralco's residential customers
National Committee to Support Agrarian Reform in Negros
Deadline for hiring researcher-writer extended
Family day for peace
Akyat sa Banahaw para sa Kalinaw

ARCHIVE

Doloricon's world

UNITED NATIONS, Apr 14 -- A multinational coalition of jurists and civil society groups says it is launching an initiative to investigate alleged war crimes in Iraq for potential prosecution by the young International Criminal Court (ICC) or other legal bodies.

The move is motivated in part by Washington's recent declaration that it plans to set up its own tribunal to try alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in the nation that it invaded last month, despite widespread calls for an international body that would also examine US conduct in Iraq.

“Lawyers recognize no such principle as 'victors' justice', the idea that it is just going to be the Iraqis and Saddam Hussein who have to face the consequences of committing war crimes,” said Phil Shiner of the Birmingham, UK-based group Public Interest Lawyers.

“In this new era where we have an International Criminal Court (ICC) and the linking of the penal code of the international criminal statute to Geneva Convention provisions, we think it is very important that all parties to conflict respect and comply with those provisions,” he told reporters.

Another member said that the coalition would prefer to see a United Nations tribunal investigate and try alleged war crimes, but acknowledged that is unlikely because such a proposal would be vetoed by the UN Security Council.
UN-appointed tribunal unrealistic

“Is it really realistic that the UN is going to appoint a tribunal to look at all these crimes with the US sitting there (on the Security Council) with a veto?'' asked Michael Ratner of the Center for Constitutional Rights.

“What is very upsetting to us is that the US has said that they will prosecute war crimes but will really be prosecuting only the war crimes, if any, committed by Iraq,” he added. “Both sides should have to comply with the Geneva Conventions, but this (US) scenario is essentially a victor's justice.”

”We don't know if war crimes have been committed but there are very worrisome aspects that deserve some examination and inquiry,” Ratner said.

The US military has been condemned for using weapons such as cluster bombs and depleted uranium in its invasion that have a devastating impact on civilians. It is also accused by human rights groups of targeting known civilian sites and journalists' offices.
Setting the criteria

The first phase of the coalition's initiative will take place May 24-25 when five international law experts meet in London to establish the criteria for determining what constitutes “war crimes, crimes against humanity and aggression”.

An estimated three months later, the tribunal will sit again in Rome to decide if significant evidence exists that war crimes were committed in Iraq. The group would then move to present the evidence to the ICC or another global legal body.

One large obstacle to an ICC prosecution is the fact that Washington is not a party to the treaty that created the body earlier this year, so is not under its jurisdiction. But the United Kingdom is a party to the Rome Statute, so a case could be brought against it for committing war crimes if evidence exists, Shiner explained, even by a “non-State”.

“In terms of practicality, there is absolutely nothing to suggest that the ICC Prosecutor couldn't take our report if there were a report that war crimes had been committed and evidence that we would present and take that as a starting point for an investigation.”

Ratner suggested a case could be made that the US military should be subject to ICC jurisdiction because US bombers took off from British soil in many cases, but the coalition acknowledged that that is a controversial viewpoint.
US violated international laws

The group, which also has members in Canada, Australia and Italy, stressed that the US-led invasion did violate global laws.

“The international laws that we are talking about are the most basic standards of justice agreed to after World War II, that is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the United Nations Charter, and the Geneva Conventions,'' said Richard Normand, executive director of the US-based group Committee on Economic and Social Rights (CESR).

“These three major bodies of law represented a coming together of public morality and international law. So the notion that the United States has been arguing recently, which is that international law doesn't matter because we can choose what is moral to do in this country or that country, essentially opens the field for anyone.”

Citing recent remarks by the Indian prime minister, who claimed that India has a legitimate right to use the US' “Iraq doctrine” against Pakistan, Normand suggested that a dangerous precedent is being set, which could also be employed by Israeli forces in Palestine and in future conflicts worldwide.

**********
+Public Interest Lawyers
( http://www.publicinterestlawyers.co.uk/international_humanitarian_law.htm)
+Center for Constitutional Rights
( http://www.ccr-ny.org/v2/viewpoints/docs/no_war_pamphlet.pdf)
+International Criminal Court
( http://www.un.org/law/icc/index.html)
+Center for Economic and Social Rights
( http://www.cesr.org/iraq/)

– CyberDyaryo 04-16-03