4-01-05, 11:53 am
US Abstains on ICC Prosecution of Darfur Atrocities
After delaying since the Feb. 1 recommendation by a special UN commission to refer the war crimes committed by government-backed militia in Darfur to the International Criminal Court (ICC), the Bush administration acquiesced under tremendous pressure yesterday in a late session of the UN Security Council.
Initially, the US delegation expressed an intention to veto the French-proposed resolution on the ICC, because the Bush administration strongly opposes the ICC. The administration has led a campaign to weaken the Court's jurisdiction and authority by pressuring countries to accept exemptions for US personnel in numerous bilateral agreements.
The problem the administration faced, however, is that a veto would have given the appearance that it did not seek justice for the estimated 300,000 people who have been killed by the Sudanese government-back Janjaweed militia. This position is especially surprising since the Bush administration labeled the crimes in Darfur genocide. Did the administration consider its ideological opposition to the Court more important than what it had called genocide? ()
The UN did not go that far, but it did say the war crimes and mass killings were no less serious and recommended that those responsible be referred to a special prosecutor from the ICC. UN officials, international delegates, and human rights activists argued that the ICC was especially necessary because the Sudanese government refused to punish the criminals.
This key factor made the ICC the best and only place that justice could be served and that future crimes could be prevented.
Earlier in March, the US backed a proposal to try the criminals in an African Union court that it would finance. Most of the international community, including dozens of human rights organizations based in the Sudan and other parts of Africa, insisted that it would not bring justice or deter future crimes. Justice required the ICC, which has received endorsement from about 100 countries. (Related story – click here.)
The government of Sudan shares Bush's opposition to the Rome treaty that created the ICC and opposed sending the case to that Court.
Late last night, however, the US relented and abstained from voting rather than vetoing the resolution, allowing it to pass by 11 votes. The drafters of the resolution agreed to amend the language to include exemptions from ICC prosecution for countries that are not signatories to the Rome Treaty.
Human Rights Groups Denounce Exemptions as 'Unacceptable'
Amnesty International released a statement following the vote announcing that it welcomed the outcome of the vote, but criticized the delay and described the exemptions won by the US as 'totally unacceptable.' Says Amnesty, 'It creates double standards of justice, contravenes the UN Charter, the Rome Statute and other international law.'
Richard Dicker of Human Rights Watch said, 'This historic step by the Security Council offers real hope of protection for people in Darfur.' But Dicker also expressed opposition to the exemption given to non-ICC states as it violated long-established principles of jurisdiction.
The Security Council also agreed to send a 10,000-strong peacekeeping force to the Sudan and to strengthen sanction against that country.
UN Secretary General Kofi Annan praised the decision and described the ICC as 'appropriate mechanism to lift the veil of impunity that has allowed human rights crimes in Darfur to continue unchecked.'
Cynical maneuvering and delays by the Bush administration do indeed show that it is more interested in winning political battles and imposing its will on the world than it is in justice.
--Joel Wendland is managing editor of Political Affairs and may be reached at jwendland@politicalaffairs.net.
