Asheville Daily Planet
RSS Facebook
World courtís role, historical origins outlined at forum
Tuesday, 06 March 2007 18:25
BY JIM GENARO

Despite a lack of support from the Bush administration, the International Criminal Court has been a successful tool for bringing perpetrators of crimes against humanity to justice, according to Paul J. Magnarella, director of peace and justice studies at Warren Wilson College.

Magnarella discussed the history of international criminal tribunals at UNC Ashevilleís Humanities Lecture Hall on Feb. 27. The lecture was sponsored by the World Affairs Council of Western North Carolina as part of the organizationís Great Decisions 2007 lecture series. About 40 people attended the talk.


As a former legal adviser for the United Nations Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Magnarella said he had ìstudied the law pertaining to defendantsí rights ó especially with respect to confronting witnesses against them.î

This was particularly problematic in cases in which the people who were testifying against accused abusers were victims of rape, and might have undergone significant psychological trauma had they confronted their attackers in person, he said.

To solve this problem, Magnarella helped the court devise a system whereby witnesses in a remote location could be seen by the judges, but remain anonymous to the defendant. To verify the identity of the person, the judges would ask ìquestions that only one that was in the camp (where the atrocities occurred) could have answered,î Magnarella said.


ìItís been, I think, a very good development,î he said of the procedure.


Magnarella then began to trace the history of international tribunals, starting with the establishment in 1945 of the International Military Tribunal at Nuremburg.


Created by the U.S., Great Brittan, France and the Soviet Union to try Nazi war criminals, the court has often been described as a ìvictorís tribunal,î Magnarella said, because the Allies ìwere not subject to prosecution by this tribunal.î


Early on in the courtís development, a decision was made that individuals ó not the German people as a whole ó would be tried. Twenty-two top Nazi officials were tried, of whom all but two were convicted.

The courtís mandate also outlined the specific types of crimes it could try. Among these was murder, which did not include killing soldiers in war, but rather civilians and non-combatants; crimes against the peace; and crimes against humanity.

This last category provided an important foundation for future international laws.


Magnarella defined crimes against humanity as ìmurder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population.î


Significantly, with such crimes, it became established in international law that ìany country can prosecute, if it wants to, those responsible for it,î he added.


However, after the Nuremburg Trials, international cooperation in combating abuses was stymied by the Cold War, Magnarella added. It was not until the 1990s when the breakup of the former Yugoslavia led to a humanitarian crisis that international tribunals were established again.


In 1980, Joseph Tito, the despotic president of Yugoslavia, died. The country, which was comprised of numerous ethnically dominated provinces, including Serbia and Croatia, began to fall apart without a strong ruler to hold them together. As one territory after another began declaring independence, conflicts started to break out.


ìBecause of the ultra-nationalism of some Serbs, some Croats, the fighting became quite brutal,î Magnarella said.


In some areas, ìethnic-cleansingî campaigns were carried out to eliminate undesirable minorities.

Seeking to stem the violence, the international community stepped in to establish a tribunal to try accused war criminals.

ìThe hope was that once the tribunal was working, these leaders that were committing these atrocities would stop and think, ëWait a minute ó I might be prosecuted,íî Magnarella told the audience.


However, that did not happen, she said. Instead, the period after the establishment of the ICTFY in 1993 saw some of the most horrific violence of the conflict.


The United Nations established the ICTFY under Chapter 7 of its charter ó an important distinction, Magnarella noted.


All member-states are required to cooperate with a body established under Chapter 7, he said. This meant that if a country was holding suspects that were wanted by the tribunal, they could be forced to extradite them ó or face sanctions.


Building on the successes of the Nuremburg Trials and the ICTFY, the U.N. in 2003 established a new international tribunal: the International Criminal Court. The court is charged with prosecuting crimes that violate the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Conventions of 1907, the 1948 Conventions on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide and all other crimes against humanity.


Crimes against humanity, Magnarella noted, include crimes against ethnic groups that fall short of genocide. ìYou just have to prove that they were persecuted and that certain crimes were committed against them in a widespread and systematic manner.î


Turning to the subject of genocide, Magnarella said that one of the most brutal genocides in recent history was that between the Hutus and the Tutsis in Rwanda in the 1990s.


During a clash between the two ethnic groups, more than 800,000 Tutsis were killed by Hutu militias before an alliance of Tutsi soldiers and leaders from neighboring Uganda joined together to drive the Hutu factions out.


However, by the time they did so, ìmost of those responsible for the genocide had escaped Rwanda,î Magnarella said.


After its elections in 2002, Rwanda was unable to get most of those people extradited for trial, because it did not have extradition treaties with its neighbors.


Furthermore, Rwanda practices capital punishment and many countries will not extradite prisoners to a country where they might be killed for their crimes. Therefore, Rwanda turned to the ICC.


So far, the court has passed judgment on 31 accused people, convicting 27 of them. Another 27 are currently being tried and nine more await trial.


Meanwhile, the U.S. has resisted ratifying the ICC. Though President Bill Clinton signed on to the court, it was never ratified by the U.S. Senate and President Bush withdrew from it shortly after taking office, Magnarella said.


The court operates under a two-track system, he noted. A prosecution can be started by the U.N. Security Council under Chapter 7, which requires all member-states to cooperate with it.


However, an individual country can also request an investigation, which must be cooperated with only by signatories of the courtís charter.


The ICC also has certain limitations, Magnarella said. It can only investigate crimes in countries where the government is unwilling or unable to do so itself. The Security Council can also intervene to postpone an investigation by up to one year.


Thirdly, the ICC only has authority in cases where either the state involved or the nationality of origin of the accused is a state that signed the courtís charter.


For its part, the Bush administration has vigorously worked to ensure that American officials can not be prosecuted by the court, Magnarella said. It has tied foreign aid to requirements that countries receiving such aid will agree to never turn a U.S. citizen over to the ICC. Likewise, these agreements give assurances that the U.S. will not turn over accused criminals from the countries that receive aid.


This has not raised the esteem of the U.S. worldwide, Magnarella told the audience. ìThe U.S. is earning itself a worse reputation than it already has,î he said, and some countries have refused aid rather than agree to the demands of the U.S.


Though the ICC has a wider jurisdiction than any previous international tribunal, Magnarella noted that ìto be effective, the major powers ó the U.S., Russia, China and India ... must join the court.î

He closed his talk by charging his audience to tell elected officials to support the ICC.

ìI think that American citizens that are really interested in peace and human rights should give this tribunal all the support they can,î Magnarella told the audience.

 



 


contact | home

Copyright ©2005-2015 Star Fleet Communications

224 Broadway St., Asheville, NC 28801 | P.O. Box 8490, Asheville, NC 28814
phone (828) 252-6565 | fax (828) 252-6567

a Cube Creative Design site