Back to Current Articles on ICC in the Security Council
Articles
2003 | 20022003
Over 50 Countries Voice ICC Support in Security Council Open Debate (October 1, 2003)
In a Security Council debate on "Justice and the Rule of Law," member states highlighted the need for a "strengthened relationship between the UN system in general and the ICC." (NGO Coalition for the ICC)
US Arm -Twisting Leads to Violations of National and International Law, NGOs Say (August 1, 2003)
The Coalition for the International Criminal Court denounces the UN Security Council for adopting a resolution authorizing the deployment of a multinational stabilization force to Liberia that gives broad immunities to some troops.
States Send Clear Message to US: Don't Expect Permanent Exemption from ICC (June 12, 2003)
The Lawyers' Committee for Human Rights criticizes the passage of Resolution 1487, but also notes the groundswell of opposition to the resolution exempting US soldiers from the ICC.
Secretary General Criticizes US-Backed Extension of Immunity from ICC (June 12, 2003)
In an open debate of the Security Council, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan criticizes the US-backed renewal of an exemption for US soldiers from the ICC, questioning both its necessity and legality.
US Confronts EU on War Crimes Court (June 10, 2003)
The US has issued an "unusually tough warning" to supporters of the ICC not to resist a renewal of special immunity for US soldiers. In a confidential memo leaked to the Washington Post, the US warned such resistance would severely damage relations.(Washington Post)
US Seeks Exemption from War Crimes Court (June 9, 2003)
US efforts to exempt itself from the ICC have lead to a strong backlash among supporters of the Court. Germany and Mexico are expected to lead opposition to the US move in the Security Council. (One World)
US Will Seek Extension of Deal to Exempt American Peacekeepers from Prosecution by International Criminal Court (June 6, 2003)
In 2002 the Security Council undermined the credibility of the ICC by exempting US citizens from the Court's jurisdiction. As the US pushes for a renewal of the exemption, other nations and human rights groups strive for universal adherence to the law. (Associated Press)
The Unlawful Attempt by the Security Council to Give US Citizens Permanent Impunity from International Justice (May 1, 2003)
Amnesty International questions the legality of Security Council resolution 1422 which grants US citizens immunity from the ICC's jurisdiction. They call on member states to reject a renewal of the resolution when it expires on June 30, 2003.
The ICC and the Security Council: Resolution 1422: Legal and Policy Analysis (May, 2003)
Human Rights Watch gives a detailed analysis of how the US move to exempt its troops from prosecution under the ICC not only undermines efforts to hold war criminals accountable, but also violates international law. (Human Rights Watch)
2002
On World Court, US Focus Shifts to Shielding Officials (September 7, 2002)
The US finally admits that its primary reason for seeking immunity from the ICC is to protect its top officials, such as President George Bush, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, or Secretary of State Collin Powell, reports the New York Times.
NGOs Urge Europeans to Call US Bluff Over ICC (September 4, 2002)
NGOs urge European states to resist US efforts to obtain immunity for its citizens, calling the US threat to pull out of peacekeeping operations in the Balkans a bluff. (Agence France Presse)
EU Legal Experts Say Nations Have No Right to Exempt US Military from War Crimes Trials (August 28, 2002)
The EU defined its collective position: The US demand "defeats the very object and purpose" of the Rome Statute. Therefore, European nations have no right under international law to exempt US nationals from war crimes prosecutions at the International Criminal Court. (Associated Press)
US Issues Warning to Europeans in Dispute Over New Court (August 26, 2002)
Unable to reach bilateral agreements with European governments, the Bush administration is threatening that the US role in Nato will change if Washington doesn't obtain Americans' immunity in the International Criminal Court. (New York Times)
Surrendering Reason to Power (August 17, 2002)
The latest US effort to undermine the International Criminal Court involves approaching governments and seeking Article 98 agreements against surrendering any US suspect to the court. To pressure other governments, the Bush administration is citing the newly passed "Hague Invasion Act" or the threat of withdrawing military aid. (Foreign Policy in Focus)
US Efforts to Obtain Impunity for Genocide, Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes (August 2002)
Amnesty International analyzes Article 98 of the Rome Statute and demonstrates that by signing bilateral agreements with the US, states violate international law. Article 98 was drafted to "address the question of the relationship between the obligations of states parties under the future Rome Statute and existing obligations of states parties under international law," not to grant blanket immunity.
US Must Affirm Its Commitment to Peacekeeping (July 18, 2002)
The dispute between the US and the UN regarding the ICC and peacekeeping has left the world with a bitter aftertaste. The issue has "lent credibility" to those who worry about US unilateralism and has raised further questions about American commitment to peacekeeping. (Baltimore Sun)
International Criminal Court: Immunity for Peace-Keepers is a Setback for International Justice (July 15, 2002)
Public statement made by Amnesty International concerning Resolution 1422, which effectively grants peacekeepers immunity for a period of 12 months. Amnesty considers such resolution unlawful and a blow to international justice as well as to the international community's efforts to hold criminals accountable.
Both Sides Bruised after US Deal over War Crimes Court (July 14, 2002)
The adoption of resolution 1422, giving US peacekeepers immunity from the ICC for a 12 month period, left ICC supporters worried about a creeping two-tier global justice. The US also remains unsatisfied as the resolution simply deferred the dispute for a year. (Associated Press)
Criminal Court Impasse Broken (July 13, 2002)
The impasse over the ICC at the Security Council has been broken. However, resolution 1244 is not a solution, only a deferral. With no party fully satisfied and accusations of US attacks on international legal institutions, the issue promises to promptly come back to the Council's table.(Institute for War and Peace Reporting)
UN Close to Agreement on US Global Court Dispute (July 12, 2002)
The US managed to partially impose its will on members of the UN Security Council to vote a case-by-case exemption for US peacekeepers from ICC prosecution. In the next 12 months the ICC will defer all such cases "unless the Security Council decides otherwise." (Reuters)
Letter Sent to the President of the UN Security Council by the Ambassadors of New Zealand, South Africa, Brazil and Canada (July 12, 2002)
Letter written in relation to the Council's draft resolution to allow peacekeepers to be exempt from ICC jurisdiction for a renewable period of 12 months.
US Backs Off Court Immunity Demand (July 11, 2002)
"The United States has retreated from its demand that American peacekeepers be permanently immune from the new war crimes tribunal and are instead proposing a yearlong ban on any investigation." (Associated Press)
UK Accused of Preparing a Deal with America over Criminal Court (July 10, 2002)
The possibility of the UK "selling out to America on the ICC" seems now probable. A "complex manoeuvre" by the US centers on elected members and asks them "to support either the ICC or UN peace-keeping," in what has been called "a false and disgusting choice and an absurd ideological attack on the ICC". (Independent)
US Criticized on Immunity Demand (July 10, 2002)
The UN Security Council criticizes the US proposal to amend an international treaty and to take peacekeeping operations hostage until the US gets its way. Canada stresses that "the credibility of the Council, the legality of international treaties, and the principle that all people are equal and accountable before the law were at stake." (Associated Press)
Bosnia Mission Mandate in Question, as Security Council Debates Legal Exposure of UN Peacekeepers (July 10, 2002)
Press release of the UN Security Council open meeting showing an overwhelming support for the ICC by member states and a rejection of the US proposal of granting the Council the power to override international treaties.
Why Does America Fear This Court? (July 9, 2002)
European Commissioner for External Relations, Chris Patten, responds to American concerns over the ICC. The US is undermining its own past efforts in international justice and is bridging the gap between its power and "moral consensus." (Washington Post)
UN Security Council to Let UN Members Express Views on US Threat to End Bosnia Peacekeeping (July 8, 2002)
Following a request by the Permanent Mission of Canada to the UN, the Security Council will hold an open debate in which UN member states are encouraged to voice their opinion on the issues at stake. Opposition to the US stand of more than 120 states will hopefully "prompt Washington to reconsider the damaging policy it's pursuing." (Associated Press)
A Superpower's Loneliness (July 8, 2002)
The US has alienated itself from its strongest allies by its continuous efforts to undermine the ICC. As The Christian Science Monitor argues, the US is falling into a dangerous trap in doing so, and "it may encourage nations with bad human rights records to seek exemptions from international rules."
The Battle over Peacekeepers (July 5, 2002)
Listen to an expert discussion on the US position on peacekeeping and the ICC. Participants include Maj. Gen. (Ret.) William Nash, who led peacekeeping missions in Bosnia and Kosovo; David Lightburn, from the Canada-based Pearson Peacekeeping Centre, and Andrew Bacevich, Director of the Center for International Relations at Boston University. (The Connection, WBUR-Boston)
US Delays Veto of UN Troops in Bosnia: Security Council allowed 12 Days to Solve Court Crisis (July 4, 2002)
The extension of the UN peacekeeping mission in Bosnia will allow Washington and its opponents in the UN Security Council time to find solutions that will bridge the differences on the jurisdiction of the ICC over US peacekeepers. (San Francisco Chronicle)
White House: Won't Abandon Bosnia (July 3, 2002)
The EU ambassadors unanimously rejected the US proposal, which would have allowed Security Council permanent members to permanently block ICC's prosecution of peacekeepers. Washington vowed to stay committed to its peacekeeping obligations in Bosnia even if the deadlock persists. (Associated Press)
EU Ready to Take Control of UN Bosnia Mission (July 3, 2002)
The EU has shown resolve to take over police training if the US vetoes an extension of the peacekeeping mission in Bosnia. Despite the negative effects on the peace process in Bosnia, such scenario could catalyze the formation of the EU peacekeeping force. (Reuters)
Bosnia: Fears Over UN Pullout (July 3, 2002)
A US veto on the renewal of the UN peacekeeping mission in Bosnia will have deep repercussions. The Institute for War and Peace Reporting says that the premature ending of the mission will undermine the rule of law and the respect for human rights, leave hundreds unemployed, and leave organized crime unchecked.
Letter from UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to US Secretary of State Colin Powell (July 3 2002)
Secretary General Kofi Annan evaluates the US proposal as a measure which would discredit the Security Council and offers invaluable advice on how to overcome the current deadlock.
Washington Versus International Justice (July 2, 2002)
July 1, 2002 is the day the international community took a big step forward in its search for international justice and the day "the United States missed the boat in a big way." The US is resorting to unlawful "open blackmail" to have its way. (Le Monde)
The Time of Human Rights (July 2, 2002)
Italian commentator argues that the ICC will put an end to "moral double standards". Ironically, the power of international law was born at the Nuremberg's trial thanks to US support. "Why forget that lesson?" (La Stampa)
Collateral Costs in Fighting a New Court (July 2, 2002)
The top UN official in Sarajevo, Paddy Ashdown, suggests that an early pullout of the UN police force from Bosnia will slowdown the training of Bosnian police force. Law-enforcement remains crucial in bringing order back, giving refugees confidence to return, and, above all, fighting organized crime. (New York Times)
UN Peace Operations in Danger of Being Crippled (July 2, 2002)
Following its veto on the renewal of the UN peacekeeping mission in Bosnia, the US could veto the continuation of five other mandates, expiring in July. US reluctance to simply withdraw its peacekeepers, instead of vetoing renewals, clearly shows its broader goal of undermining the International Criminal Court. (The Times)
Tipping the Scales of Justice (July 1, 2002)
What is at stake in the current UN Security Council deadlock is much more than immunity for peacekeepers, it boils down to conflicting principles on international criminal law and human rights. US efforts to "strangle (the ICC) at birth" raise many questions regarding its credibility as a global leader. (Economist)
War Crimes Court Comes Into Existence (July 1, 2002)
In what many countries consider to be one of the most significant triumphs of international law, the birth of the ICC denotes a post- and -pre ICC era in international criminal law, despite US opposition to such an advancement. (Associated Press)
The US Assault on World Criminal Court (July 1, 2002)
Senior White House Advisor on UN issues criticizes President Bush's radical assault on the ICC as a counter-productive measure, which will harm US global leadership in the long run. (Boston Globe)
US Vetoes Bosnia Mission, Then Allows 3-Day Reprieve (July 1, 2002)
Claiming to remain "committed to international peace and security," the US has vetoed the UN resolution renewing the peacekeeping mission in Bosnia and will not "budge down in its demand" for immunity. Arguing that "none of this is our doing," the US is devoted to undermining international law. (New York Times)
Security Council: No Double Standards on International Justice (July 1, 2002)
Amnesty International has launched a world-wide appeal calling on everyone to support the ICC and oppose any Security Council action that might undermine the integrity of the court and international justice
Authority of the Security Council to Exempt Peacekeepers from International Criminal Court Proceedings (July, 2002)
An in-depth legal analysis by the American Society of International Law into the debate over the ICC and the US request to grant blanket immunity to peacekeepers.
US Vetoes Peacekeeping Extension (June 30, 2002)
Following its threats, the US has vetoed the Security Council Resolution renewing the UN peacekeeping mission in Bosnia as a result of its failure to win immunity for US citizens from the ICC. (Associated Press)
US Proposals to Undermine the International Criminal Court Through a UN Security Council Resolution (June 25, 2002)
A Human Rights Watch backgrounder analyzes the US attempts to undermine the ICC. The document argues that the Bush administration was wrong to draw parallels between its own draft resolution and the UK negotiated exemption from prosecution for ISAF peacekeepers in Afghanistan.
Open Letter to Members of the UN Security Council from the Coalition for the International Criminal Court's Convenor (June 25, 2002)
Letter by the Coalition for the International Criminal Court requesting the Security Council to reject the US proposals to grant peacekeepers immunity from prosecution by the ICC.
Letter to US Senators Regarding the American Servicemembers Protection Act (ASPA) (June 24, 2002)
Benjamin B. Ferencz , former Nuremberg Prosecutor, confronts US Senators on the ASPA and its impact on the ICC and international law. (Benjamin B. Ferencz's Website)
US Veto Threat 'Frontal Attack' On Law (June 22, 2002)
Canada condemns the US threat to disrupt international peacekeeping operations, unless a clause for immunity is inserted, as a "frontal attack on international law and the rule of law." Canada believes that such a proposal undermines the rule of law, and urges the Security Council to reject it. (National Post)
US Seeks Immunity for all UN Peacekeepers (June 20, 2002)
The US has asked the Security Council to provide immunity from international tribunals to all people taking part in UN peacekeeping operations, and has threatened that "without a blanket exemption, US personnel will not take part in UN peacekeeping missions". Still, the US faces "an uphill struggle" in the Council where the ICC has wide support. (Associated Press)
US Seeks Court Immunity For East Timor Peacekeepers (May 16, 2002)
The International Criminal Court might be a stumbling block to future US participation in peacekeeping missions. The US seeks assurances that its UN personnel in East Timor will be exempted from prosecution by the ICC. Major US allies oppose these demands, and see them as another undermining of the ICC. (The Washington Post)
