Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!
The World Affairs Board is the premier forum for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include military and defense developments, international terrorism, insurgency & COIN doctrine, international security and policing, weapons proliferation, and military technological development.
Our membership includes many from military, defense, academic, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
Where is the inquiry and follow up in USA for not only rumoured, but already effectively prosecuted under ICC jurisdiction war criminals
History teaches that the failure to comprehensively deal with allegations and indicators of breaches of Law of Armed Conflict as they begin to emerge and circulate is corrosive - it gives spurious allegations life, and serious allegations a degree of impunity. The consequences of not addressing such allegations as and when they eventually arise are measured in decades
Originally posted by Officer of EngineersView Post
Another fantasy post. ICC holds zero jurisdiction over US military personel and your quote deals with the LOAC, NOT THE ROME STATURES NOR THE ICC.
Keep dreaming. Oh BTW, there were several prosecutions in the US under the UCMJ which you know nothing about.
Go on! Show me the ICC case!
Put up or shut up.
I'm truly amazed, Colonel. how you continue to have enough patience to continue posting as I would have said the hell with it long ago. Much better to sit back, relax, and have a shot of your favorite like I am right now.
If this is really another Colonel that has emerged here, We are looking forward to have some General at last, competent with International Law matters and more responsible to comprehend and interpret comments and quoted documents correctly while using decent language enough that makes discussion possible. Otherwise, such persistently aggressive conduct can only be explained with problem some apparently have because of International Justice development
If this is really another Colonel that has emerged here, We are looking forward to have some General at last, competent with International Law matters and more responsible to comprehend and interpret comments and quoted documents correctly while using decent language enough that makes discussion possible. Otherwise, such persistently aggressive conduct can only be explained with problem some apparently have because of International Justice development
There is only one Colonel here and I have a real problem with stupid. Stupid gets people killed and you have more than demonstrated such irreponsible behaviour. If you want to continue to show stupid, I will continue treating stupid. You know nothing about Law. How about understanding the fact the Law is written exactly the way it's meant to be and not what you want it to be. THERE IS NOTHING in the Rome Statues THAT OBLIGATES ANY SIGNATTORY to arrest any ICC accused. NOTHING.
DO NOT PRETEND THAT YOU ARE THE AUTHORITY ON THE ROME STATUES. You have not even read it in full. If you did, you will note that the MILITARY don't answer to the ICC. Never did. Never will.
By the way, you don't have a "We." There's only you. Note. No one here has come to your defence because no one here, especially military people, defends stupid.
I'm still waiting on your non-existing case. Go on. You've made the assertion that the ICC has prosecuted Americans. Show it. Shut me up.
I'm truly amazed, Colonel. how you continue to have enough patience to continue posting as I would have said the hell with it long ago. Much better to sit back, relax, and have a shot of your favorite like I am right now.
Don't drink during deer season for obvious reasons. Firearms and alcohol do not mix well. So, I need a chew toy instead,
Yep, as I figured. Wishing instead of reading. Now, where in all of there is a military officer obligated to execute an arrest warrant for a ICC criminal? Cannot even understand a simple thing as jurisdiction and AO. You mean to tell me that the ICC can demand Canada to go into Afghanistan to arrest a CIA operative that we never heard of? TRY THE HELL AGAIN!
Article 86 - General obligation to cooperate.
Yeah, couldn't find the word, "obey" there.
And extremely funny - NOTHING ABOUT MILITARY OBLIGATIONS! Yeah, keep continuing to show stupid.
Also, did you even read this entire thing, "request" this, "request" that. ZERO on demand and execution. Look in the dictionary for the word, "request" IT IS NOT AN OBLIGATION. Go on! Prove you can understand simple English. Do you even understand this? An accused have the right to challenge the arrest in the arresting country. If that country's courts, say Afghanistan, found insufficent evidence for the arrest, the ICC is SOL. Wonder why Dotsum is still walking free? No Afghan court would touch him and no ICC corut either! Not that you would know such things. BTW, that's your Article 20 of the Rome Statues.
Again, I'm waiting on your non-existing case on ICC prosecution of Americans.
Hehehahahahahahahahahaha!!!!! This is what you're screaming about? What a kangaroo court!!!!!!! A New York Defence Lawyer would tear this Court to shreds.
Very few convictions. Can't get their paperwork together. Accused showing up for court but not allow into court to even enter a plea to have their whole cases dropped. The few convictions they've got, the guilty was safer in jail than to be release to face their enemies on the street.
“Justice delayed is justice denied,” Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda emphasized, outlining numerous instances of non-compliance by both the Government of Sudan and third-party States. Noting that five arrest warrants remain outstanding for current and former Sudanese officials ‑ including President Omer al-Bashir - she said they contain more than 60 counts of war crimes and 50 counts of crimes against humanity, such as extermination, murder, rape and torture. “The body of evidence is increasing, and my prosecution team continues to prepare in anticipation of the future arrest and surrender of any of the Darfur suspects,” she affirmed.
Noting that levels of violence in Darfur decreased over the reporting period, she said that impunity, as well as reports of serious crimes, regrettably persist. Meanwhile, Mr. Bashir and others accused of war crimes continue to travel internationally - including to States parties to the Rome Statute - with no response from the Council, she noted. In a related Arria-formula meeting in July, she recalled, several States voiced concern over such inaction and proposed concrete, workable measures to enhance cooperation between the Court and the Council. “I remain hopeful that the constructive dialogue and proposals at that meeting will provide further momentum,” she said, declaring: “The critical eyes of history are upon us.”
Tell me it isn't so, the ICC cannot enforce it's own warrants and relies on the UNSC (with US, Russian, and Chinese vetos - by God, non-RS signatories) for enforcement.
DECIDES that the matter of Jordan’s non-compliance with the request for arrest and surrender of Omar Al-Bashir to the Court be referred, through the President of the Court in accordance with regulation 109(4) of the Regulations of the Court, to the Assembly of States Parties of the Rome Statute and the United Nations Security Council.
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha. Mommy, Jordan won't do as I say!!!!!! Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Wping a tear from my eye! This is the International Justice you're so high and mighty about?
This is more laughable by the minute.
From the ICC's own pages, they have exactly ZERO AUTHORITY over me!
The Colonel is correct (and he is definitely NOT a bot) and you are incorrect.
Per NATO regulations NATO officers must follow Article 86 as far as cooperation but do not take that as an order.
It is simple as this...NATO officers are bound by their oaths to their parent country and the orders of senior officers. While serving in NATO status that includes all NATO officers senior to said officer.
However, if a an officer's country does not recognize the authority of the ICC that officer is under no obligation to follow what the ICC says or follow the Rome Statute.
European officers may have different rules under EU...but North AMerican officers have zero requirement to follow.
“Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
Mark Twain
Hehehahahahahahaha. A bot going through your article, picking out revelent quotes. Then, doing a google on non-compliance and then finding signatory countries that ignores ICC warrants with zero consequences and pointing out the only ICC recourse is to go crying to the UNSC of which 3 Permenant Members will veto the shit out of the ICC. Then pointing out from the ICC own webites that the ICC holds zero authority over anyone, that the ICC does not have enforcement authority to force anyone to comply.
Per NATO regulations NATO officers must follow Article 86 as far as cooperation but do not take that as an order.
Buck, not even that. The ICC does not have authority even over signatory countries. EU countries are not bound, even by treaty, to the RS. There are enough loop holes that you could drive a truck through. When a small power like Jordan can ignore ICC warrants using those same loop holes, the ICC can only go complaining to the UNSC to which ... nothing. What MAX do not understand that Lawyers written the Rome Statues and you can bet that they worded enough loop holes to disregard the ICC when they choose.
Case in point. There's a warrant out for Sudan's Head of State. Not only has no country declare war, as obligated by the Rome Statues that MAX wants you to believe, to arrest the fuck. The fuck even travelled freely through RS signatory countries with zero effort to arrest him. Their excuse? He's a Head of State. To arrest him would be a violation of international treaty and tantamount to a declaration of war which is outside of ICC authority.
Can you imagine any country doing that to the US? Who is stupid enough to declare war on the US?
In any case, not a single NATO country, even RS signatory countries, needs to worry about the RS nor the ICC. For Canada and the UK, the Queen's Rules trumps the RS and our prosecution of any violation of the QR&O trumps the ICC and we could tell them to go to hell as Australia has done. By the ICC's own rules, they cannot touch any American prosecuted under the UCMJ, regardless if they were pardoned in the future or not. In short, our current laws on our books effectively prevents the ICC from touching us (and that was written into the Rome Statues by our lawyers).
So, yeah, not a single NATO Officer ever needs to read up the Rome Statues ... well, maybe JAG.
Comment