Monitoring Policy Making at the United Nations |
| ||||||||||||
US Backs Off Court Immunity Demand - International Justice - Global Policy Forum US Backs Off Court Immunity Demand
Associated Press
July 11, 2002Facing worldwide opposition, the United States has retreated from its demand that American peacekeepers be permanently immune from the new war crimes tribunal. U.S. diplomats are instead proposing a yearlong ban on any investigation.
The compromise proposal made Wednesday marked a significant change in the Bush administration's campaign to shield Americans from frivolous or politically motivated prosecutions by the new International Criminal Court.
Members of the U.N. Security Council have been grappling with a U.S. threat to end U.N. peacekeeping operations, beginning with Bosnia's on July 15, if it didn't get blanket immunity. They said the latest U.S. proposal was still unsatisfactory.
Nonetheless, there was widespread relief at Washington's new willingness to negotiate.
``We have all very much welcomed the constructive approach of the U.S. at least to work with the other members,'' said Mauritius' U.N. Ambassador Jagdish Koonjul.
Britain's U.N. Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock, the current council president, called the U.S. proposal ``a fair basis for discussion'' and said consultations would continue behind closed doors on Thursday.
U.S. Ambassador John Negroponte introduced the new draft at the end of a daylong open council meeting, at which the United States faced intense criticism from nearly 40 countries for seeking permanent immunity for American peacekeepers. Only India, which also opposes the court, was somewhat sympathetic to the U.S. position.
Canada's U.N. Ambassador Paul Heinbecker, who requested the open meeting, warned that the United States was jeopardizing the credibility of the Security Council, the legality of international treaties, and the principle that all people are equal and accountable before the law.
The court's supporters accused Washington of threatening peace and stability from the Balkans and East Timor to the Mideast and Africa — places where U.N. peacekeepers operate.
The court is the product of a long campaign to create a permanent tribunal to prosecute the most heinous deeds: war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity. It came into existence on July 1 with ratifications from 76 countries and signatures from 139.
The United States objects to the idea that Americans could be subject to the court's jurisdiction — even if the United States is not a party. Washington says other countries could use this to try American soldiers for war crimes, in effect threatening U.S. sovereignty.
The new U.S. proposal would ban for 12 months ``any investigations or prosecutions'' of participants in U.N.-sanctioned peacekeeping operations from countries like the United States that have not ratified the Rome treaty formalizing the court. It also ``expresses the intention to renew the request ... for further 12-month periods for as long as may be necessary.''
Under the proposal, any peacekeeper who was exempt from investigation or prosecution for a year could be prosecuted if the exemption was not renewed — though no U.N. peacekeeper has ever been charged with a war crime.
``We have for one year a total freedom,'' said Richard Grenell, spokesman for the U.S. Mission, who said this was sufficient time to bring any American suspect home, thus out of reach of the court.
``What we have been focused on is ensuring that American men and women are not within the reach of the International Criminal Court,'' he said. ``What we have been able to offer today ... (is) that for a period of 12 months they would have that immunity.''
But the U.S. draft still raises serious questions for some council members.
The Rome treaty already allows the Security Council to request a 12-month deferral of investigation or prosecution by the court on a case-by-case basis.
Some council members — including France, which has veto power — argued that the U.S. draft would change the statute's intent by giving blanket deferral to peacekeepers. Colombia's U.N. Ambassador Alfonso Valdivieso, also a council member, called the U.S. draft ``an improvement'' because it was not ``in perpetuity.''
At the open meeting, nations from the European Union, Latin America, Africa and Asia argued that the Rome treaty has sufficient safeguards to prevent political prosecutions. First and foremost, the court will step in only when states are unwilling or unable to dispense justice.
More Information on the Current ICC Crisis at the Security Council More Information on US, UN and International Law More Information on the International Criminal Court More Information on the Veto More Information on Peacekeeping
FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C ß 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
