International Court of Justice rules for war crimes impunity

By MichelP, 15 February 2002

Henry K may breathe more easily as he dreams about foreign travel, but there are enough differences between these two news reports to make me suspect the conclusions that have been drawn.

The ICJ decision had to do with the validity of an international arrest warrant served on a former Congolese foreign minister Yerodia Aboulaye Ndombasi, accused of human rights abuses while in ofice, A controversial Belgian law gave Belgian courts universal jurisdiction, meaning they could try alleged crimes against humanity that took place on foreign soil and did not involve Belgian nationals. Ndombasi was accused in August 1988 of inciting hatred against ethnic Tutsis in speeches referring to vermin and extermination. Up to one million Tutsis and moderate Hutus were massacred in the 1994 genocide in Rwanda.

The ability of Belgium to pick up persons for trial if they set foot in that country probably can't be touched by the ICJ. Pinochet was picked up by the brits on the basis of an international warrant, but they also decided some British law about the extent of impunity of ministers once they were out of office.

So that opens up the possibility of U$-Israeli style of picking up folk by use of military force, taking them out of their havens where impunity is recognized and flying them for trial in a sort of generic Guantanamo where the decisions of ICJ are either invalid or not recognized.

Cheers
MichaelP