Yesterday, during the annual conference of the member countries of the International Criminal Court, its president warned of two extraordinary dangers. The first one mentioned by the Japanese Tomoko Akane It was more personal. Its workers, judges and prosecutors, are suffering an avalanche of “pressures” and “threats” that compromise their safety. He did not mention, in this case, the harassment suffered by the previous chief prosecutor, Fatou Bensoudawhen he tried to investigate Israel’s military actions in Palestine. Mossad, according to Guardianencouraged her to redirect her efforts elsewhere so as not to risk her family’s safety.
What he did mention was, indirectly, the efforts of two powers on the UN Security Council to prevent the Court from doing its work. On the one hand, the “threats with draconian economic sanctions” launched from the United States against those responsible for the court for requesting the arrest of the Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahuand his former Minister of Defense, Yoav Gallant. The case that corresponds to them also included three leaders of the Hamas military structure that Tel Aviv considers liquidated. The accusations for which the Hebrew politicians would have to answer would be for “intentionally and systematically depriving the civilian population of Gaza of supplies essential for survival.”
On the other hand, the Kremlin’s arrest warrants against the chief prosecutor of the Criminal Court, Karim Khanand other colleagues. It was Moscow’s reaction to the order issued by the Criminal Court against the president Vladimir Putin and the Presidential Commissioner for Children’s Rights, Maria Lvova-Belova, for the mass kidnapping of children in the occupied territories of Ukraine.
Russia’s history of dissident deaths did little to calm nerves in The Hague. “The Tribunal has been the target of attacks that seek to undermine its legitimacy and ability to administer justice and realize international law and fundamental rights,” Akame argued. “They do it with coercive measures, threats, pressure and acts of sabotage” that compromise, in their opinion, the very “existence of the court.”
“We will never give in to coercive measures, threats, sabotage or outrages. “The Court, which upholds the principle of the rule of law, will continue to pursue justice and defend the dignity and rights of victims of atrocities without fear or favor,” continuous. “I’m impressed that certain States and individuals are scandalized when independent judges issue decisions in line with the evidence and the law, when what matters is not the finger that points, but the moon.” What Akane would like is for states and individuals to be scandalized “by the criminal behavior that have been committed.”
The first chief prosecutor of the Criminal Court, Luis Moreno Ocampoexplained in EL ESPAÑOL some of the obstacles that he knew first-hand and verified that they continued to be repeated. “There is one justice for my friends and another for others,” he said. It is the legal empire of the countries that won the war. No one disputes that crime against humanity or genocide is wrong. The issue is that neither China nor the United States accept independent control. The United States, which tears its clothes with Ukraine when the Russian invades it, and is right, ignores that it did the same in Iraq and ignores the crimes committed in Gaza. We have a world that is not designed to protect the interests of each person. “The prosecution and the International Criminal Court are for that.”
Akane protested, therefore, against the insults and the impediments. They feel treated, he added, “like a terrorist organization.”. And it doesn’t help that some of the pioneer signatories of the Court’s founding text, the Treaty of Rome, weaken their defense of the court. All countries in the European Union are obliged to abide by the jurisdiction of The Hague. However, France reported that it considers Netanyahu “immune,” and left it up in the air that it would arrest him if he enters its territory. Italy, the United Kingdom and Germany expressed themselves ambiguously, and even the Netherlands, the seat of the Court, looked the other way: there may be circumstances, he assured, in which the Israeli prime minister could visit the country.
“It is a very dangerous escalation,” explained Sergey Vasíliev, professor of International Law at the Open University of the Netherlands, to the Reuters agency. “It is a step towards the dismantling of the Court as a whole.”
Add Comment