Guantanamo: Is the SCOTUS trying to head off a World Court Drama?

[bpilgrim]

Guantanamo prisoners' advocates hail Supreme Court
Reuters, UK - 3 hours ago
LONDON (Reuters) - Advocates for Guantanamo Bay detainees have hailed the US Supreme
Court's decision to examine the prisoners' cases for the first time, but ...
http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackageArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=401575§ion=news

---

In paticular the new ICC...

... To take over when national criminal justice institutions are unwilling or unable to act

"Crimes under international law by their very nature often require the direct or indirect participation of a number of individuals at least some of whom are in positions of governmental authority or military command."
-- Report of the International Law Commission, 1996

Nations agree that criminals should normally be brought to justice by national institutions. But in times of conflict, whether internal or international, such national institutions are often either unwilling or unable to act, usually for one of two reasons. Governments often lack the political will to prosecute their own citizens, or even high-level officials, as was the case in the former Yugoslavia. Or national institutions may have collapsed, as in the case of Rwanda.


... To deter future war criminals

"From now on, all potential warlords must know that, depending on how a conflict develops, there might be established an international tribunal before which those will be brought who violate the laws of war and humanitarian law. . . . Everyone must now be presumed to know the contents of the most basic provisions of international criminal law; the defence that the suspects were not aware of the law will not be permissible."
-- Hans Corell, United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs

Most perpetrators of war crimes and crimes against humanity throughout history have gone unpunished. In spite of the military tribunals following the Second World War and the two recent ad hoc international criminal tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda, the same holds true for the twentieth century. That being said, it is reasonable to conclude that most perpetrators of such atrocities have believed that their crimes would go unpunished. Effective deterrence is a primary objective of those working to establish the international criminal court. Once it is clear that the international community will no longer tolerate such monstrous acts without assigning responsibility and meting outappropriate punishment -- to heads of State and commanding officers as well as to the lowliest soldiers in the field or militia recruits -- it is hoped that those who would incite a genocide; embark on a campaign of ethnic cleansing; murder, rape and brutalize civilians caught in an armed conflict; or use children for barbarous medical experiments will no longer find willing helpers.

more...
http://www.un.org/law/icc/general/overview.htm

see also: we don't need no stink'n courts, John Bolton
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2002/9968.htm

isn't it part of the new law that only IF the charged country doesn't ACT then and only then would the international courts even CONSIDER the case :shrug:

peace

[tom_paine]

1. They just want to put a coat of legal whitewash for their Bushevik Masters

Of course, that indicts them, as well, but what Army is going to have the balls to haul them or their Bushevik Masters off to trail at the Hague.

We are entering Leo Strauss/Adolf Hitler territory here.

"The only law is superior over the inferior."

[bpilgrim]

4. the world court has found the u.s. guilty of terrorism before...

so you never know :shrug:

peace

[MoonRiver]

2. I thought BFEE got itself exempted from the ICC.

Maybe it's worried about the Hague, with which the US doesn't have prosecutorial immunity.

[bpilgrim]

6. the court is designed to deal with rouge nations

i believe ;->

peace

[tritsofme]

3. Since we are not a party to the Rome Treaty

I dont think that the ICC has any jurisdiction.

Also I think we have obtained exemption in the UNSC.

I think this is one of the reasons why we have not been brought to the ICC over the criminal war against Iraq.

[bpilgrim]

5. we are trying to get most nations to give us immunity

but not everyone is going along...

the court is designed to deal with 'rouge' nations as well ;->

peace

[Muddleoftheroad]

7. The World Court would help them

They run for election in the U.S. and enough Americans would oppose world intervention. The more the World Court does, the better off the *ites.