The new Libya is keen to show it can deliver justice, but The Hague judges will have to be involved
Comments (73)
Philippe Sands
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 20 November 2011 20.45 GMT
Article history
Saif al-Islam Gaddafi is flown to Zintan after his capture in southern Libya. Photograph: Ismail Zitouni/Reuters
Gaunt, frightened and with nowhere left to go, a captured Saif Gaddafi confronts the new Libyan government with a dilemma: whether or not to ship him off to The Hague.
In reality, the government's room for manoeuvre may be more limited than it thinks. In March, when security council resolution 1970 referred the situation in Libya to the prosecutor of the international criminal court, it internationalised the judicial response to Saif's alleged crimes. In May, the prosecutor reported that Saif was associated with the killings of peaceful demonstrators, the recruitment and mobilisation of mercenaries and militias, and the imprisonment and elimination of opponents. On 27 June, three ICC judges issued an international arrest warrant against him, citing him as a co-perpetrator in crimes against humanity, with his father and Abdullah al-Senussi, the head of military intelligence – now also reportedly captured.
The June decision gave the ICC judges a key role in deciding where and how Saif will be tried. Although Libya is not a party to the ICC statute, it is a UN member, and resolution 1970 explicitly provides that "the Libyan authorities shall co-operate fully with and provide any necessary assistance to the court and the prosecutor".
The new Libyan government is therefore bound by a legal framework: it cannot lawfully ignore the ICC judges and decide that Saif will be tried under local law. Unlike Iraq, where there was no international indictment of Saddam, the decision on Saif is not an exclusively Libyan affair.
What does this mean in practice? There are basically four options. The first is to send Saif to the ICC for trial in The Hague. Even this decision would not be free from difficulty: who decides, and according to what criteria? A second option is for the ICC and the new Libyan government to reach agreement on an ICC trial in Libya. This is not something the court has done before; it might go some way to satisfy understandable demands in Libya for a local trial, subject to international oversight and justice dispensed by international judges.
There is a third possibility, if Libya's government really does want to try him in the country under its own law and procedure: under the principle of complementarity, which may give national courts a first bite, the government may have to persuade the ICC judges it truly is able to prosecute him under fair trial conditions for the international crimes for which the international arrest warrant was issued. Libya's legal system has a terrible record on doing justice – Iraq needed extensive help from the US to create an illusion of fair trial.
A fourth option is for the Libyan courts to try him first for some other alleged crimes that are outside the jurisdiction of the ICC, for example because they occurred before February 2011, when the ICC became a player. This option would clearly be available in relation to Senussi, who has been directly implicated in the mass killings that occurred in 1996 at the notorious Abu Salim prison. Whether there is sufficient evidence against Saif is unclear.
The ICC prosecutor is in Libya this week to discuss the way forward. He will face a government that is still in flux, and under considerable local pressure to see justice is done in Libya. The bloody killing of Muammar Gaddafi, however, raises serious questions about whether that is possible, but it also increased the pressures on the new government to show it can deliver justice in a rule-of-law framework.
Many of those who say the trial should take place in Libya nevertheless recognise that Iraq's proceedings against Saddam circumvented many of his greatest crimes and came to an expedited conclusion, and wonder whether sham, local justice can ever be avoided in the aftermath of a bloody conflict. Also, the international justice may not offer the swift justice some will want, as the abortive trial of Slobodan Milosevic made clear. Others with a clear interest in what happens next will include those in the west who were, until recently, friends with Saif, wondering whether his extensive contacts will be more or less public in a trial in Libya or The Hague.
The ICC intervention helped transform the outcome in Libya by contributing to the delegitimisation of the Gaddafi regime. Military action followed and was decisive. But the ICC's role made the crimes an international matter, and in staying the hand of vengeance the Hague judges will have to be involved. The ICC is entitled to the fullest co-operation of the UK, and to hope for support from the US.
***
Comments in chronological order (Total 73 comments)
Berchmans
20 November 2011 8:55PM
Phillipe I hope the Libyans try him as his alleged crimes were a local affair. He should be treated with understanding... his father was sexually assaulted and murdered in public.
I am delighted he was not killed out of hand .This makes me hopeful he will receive a fair trial.
B
TimMiddleton
20 November 2011 8:56PM
Where should Saif Gaddafi be put on trial?
The Hague. It is important that justice is not only done but that it is seen to be done.
MrDC
20 November 2011 8:56PM
I doubt he'll get a trial anywhere
OpiumEater
20 November 2011 8:58PM
Could somebody explain to me which "crimes against humanity" Saif Al Islam committed? Granted, he and the regime weren't nice guys, but then we knew that before February 2011.
What happened after that was a bunch of guys on the one side fighting a bunch of guys on the other side. NATO decided that it was ok for one set of guys to kill the others, but if it happened the other way around (doing what any government would do: crush what was an armed resistance) then these war "crimes against humanity".
We don't know the figures of the executed and dead and disappeared Gaddafi "loyalists", but we do know that they are higher than the figures that Gaddafi was accused of before NATO intervention in March. We also know that numerous civil servants (hardly Gaddafi supporters) have disappeared. But let's remember: These are not "crimes against humanity".
If Saif is guilty of "crimes against humanity", then he was so already before February. In which case, we might suggest that some western politicians were his accomplices.
When he was arrested on Friday, I think I could hear Tony Blair tugging at his tie with his right index finger.
Radleyman
20 November 2011 9:00PM
It is vital he have a trial.
It is vital it be a fair trial.
The Hague is the only place where the trial will be conducted in a "hands-off" way.
KinkyChristian
20 November 2011 9:02PM
Where should Saif Gaddafi be put on trial?
Why is this an important issue?
rongoklunk
20 November 2011 9:04PM
I think Saif would use the ICC to grandstand and play the victim card, or otherwise deny any involvement in brutalising the Libyan people.
If he is tried in Libya - by his own people, he won't have much opportunity to play games. He would have to be serious. Very, very serious. Try him in Libya.
walacz
20 November 2011 9:08PM
Omran Eturki
"He said Saif would get a fair trial. There is no point to make a revolution for justice, and then you become the same killers.'
If they can have a fair and meaningful trial, they they are better than the USA.
SpinningHugo
20 November 2011 9:09PM
Although I have no doubt that this man should be tried at the Hague for crimes against humanity. However, he has also no doubt committed crimes under Libyan law as well. For which he must and will be tried in Libya. The intervention of the ICC does not deprive the Libyan authorities of jurisdiction in relation to offences under Libyan law as this author seems to suggest.
So to say "staying the hand of vengeance the Hague judges will have to be involved", sounds good but isn't the legal position.
PenetratingOil
20 November 2011 9:13PM
I understand this to mean we should continue meddling in Libya's internal affairs with breathtaking arrogance. Let them know where they stand eh? Under an imperialist foot, with plenty of money swilling around the useless ICC for your international lawyer mates.
nega9000
20 November 2011 9:23PM
He quite plainly should be tried in Libya.
His crimes were against Libyans, and it is to them he owes restitution.
Just want to make clear that I do not wish to see him suffer the same fate as his father. And if they must execute him, can they do it with more dignity than was given to Saddam Hussein?
daffers56
20 November 2011 9:37PM
If by chance he has incriminating evidence regarding certain Western Politicians, he may well be treated to inhumane justice? He should be tried in Libya with due process. If this cannot be guaranteed then the Hague seems the best option.
borleg
20 November 2011 9:37PM
The ICC are a joke led by a muppet, courted by the immoral and lauded by the untouchables.
Saif should be set free to live on an island somewhere, with his doctorate from the LSE.
bigfacedog
20 November 2011 9:39PM
Where should Saif Gaddafi be put on trial?
Motherwell. Give him a month to prove himself on the wing. Could be a great signing.
GregCallus
20 November 2011 9:51PM
Not quite. Resolution 1970 actually says:
“5. Decides that the Libyan authorities shall cooperate fully with and provide any necessary assistance to the Court and the Prosecutor pursuant to this resolution and, while recognizing that States not party to the Rome Statute have no obligation under the Statute, urges all States and concerned regional and other international organizations to cooperate fully with the Court and the Prosecutor;
[my emphasis]
Even if the new Libyan government ratified the Statute of Rome now, it would be ineffective re crimes committed prior to assenting [Article 11]. The UNSC might be able to act in the place of a not-competent state party [Article 13], but the idea that it can stretch jurisdiction of both time and geography is simply extra-legal.
Libya is not, and never has been, a signatory to the Statute of Rome. The ICC does not have jurisdiction for Saif Gadaffi's crimes. At all.
Article 13 via Chapter VII of the UN Charter gives the UN Security Council the right to refer a UN member state, but the preamble of Article 13 -
The Court may exercise its jurisdiction with respect to a crime referred to in article 5 in accordance with the provisions of this Statute if:
- suggests this is effective only when the Court already has jurisdiction under the statute (and the UNSC merely acts to instigate proceedings in place of the State Party).
So all we're left with is Resolution 1970 - that Libya must assist the Court. I'm sure the new administration will be happy to do so, but that does not (and I think accepts it does not) give the ICC jurisdiction.
If this is tried before the ICC, either they will be compelled to decline jurisdiction, or they will look more and more like a political court, which will do untold harm to the very notion of international criminal law.
GregCallus
20 November 2011 9:51PM
Not quite. Resolution 1970 actually says:
“5. Decides that the Libyan authorities shall cooperate fully with and provide any necessary assistance to the Court and the Prosecutor pursuant to this resolution and, while recognizing that States not party to the Rome Statute have no obligation under the Statute, urges all States and concerned regional and other international organizations to cooperate fully with the Court and the Prosecutor;
[my emphasis]
Even if the new Libyan government ratified the Statute of Rome now, it would be ineffective re crimes committed prior to assenting [Article 11]. The UNSC might be able to act in the place of a not-competent state party [Article 13], but the idea that it can stretch jurisdiction of both time and geography is simply extra-legal.
Libya is not, and never has been, a signatory to the Statute of Rome. The ICC does not have jurisdiction for Saif Gadaffi's crimes. At all.
Article 13 via Chapter VII of the UN Charter gives the UN Security Council the right to refer a UN member state, but the preamble of Article 13 -
The Court may exercise its jurisdiction with respect to a crime referred to in article 5 in accordance with the provisions of this Statute if:
- suggests this is effective only when the Court already has jurisdiction under the statute (and the UNSC merely acts to instigate proceedings in place of the State Party).
So all we're left with is Resolution 1970 - that Libya must assist the Court. I'm sure the new administration will be happy to do so, but that does not (and I think accepts it does not) give the ICC jurisdiction.
If this is tried before the ICC, either they will be compelled to decline jurisdiction, or they will look more and more like a political court, which will do untold harm to the very notion of international criminal law.
Recommend? (3)
Responses (1)
Report abuse
Link dirkbruere
20 November 2011 10:09PM
Only in the Hague will we hear the truth about Blair, and other UK establishment figures.
sharpeiboy
20 November 2011 10:26PM
In our great and benign system of western values, I fear that if he did end up in The Hague, there would be a stampede of celebrity lawyers vying to represent him. The whole trial would become a media scrum, especially if Said started naming senior politicians from the West.
Alternately he would attempt to represent himself, dragging the process on as much as he could, so that this trial could become as farcical as that of Milosevic.
It would be interesting to know how much this would cost, in our straitened circumstances; to sound like a backwoods tory, I don't like the concept of him living far better than most Libyans, in terms of accommodation and food.
If, by some perverse judgment, he were found innocent, would he retire to his mansion in Hampstead or would he be returned to Libya? Could the International Court send an invoice to the new leaders in Tripoli? I do think he should be held in one of the disgusting prisons in Libya; don't think his clan lavished much money on any of them in their decades of power.
unsouthbank
20 November 2011 10:37PM
If the Libyan authorities cannot be bothered to comply with an arrest warrant from the ICC, why should anyone else?
But Saif Gadaffi is not the only one who has a case to answer.
What about the killers of Muammar Gadaffi? - He was killed whilst under arrest and while in custody of NTC forces. There is at least a case to answer that this was murder. Where will the suspected murderers be tried?
What about the suspected murder of around 53 regime soldiers, (killed after having surrendered and in custody as prisoners of war) in the immediate aftermath of the siege and bombardment of Sirte? Where will those suspected of these murders be tried?
What about the numerous suspected murders of ethnic minority Libyans and other nationalities suspected of being Gadaffi merceneries who were not, in fact, involved in the conflict? Where will those suspected of these murders be tried?
What about those NATO and other forces who blatantly violated the terms of UNSC resolution 1970? - Just to remind you, it authorised the use of force for the purpose of enforcing a no-fly zone for the purpose of protecting civilians. It also called for a peaceful resolution to the conflict. It called for an immediate ceasefire. It called for an arms embargo to be enforced on all parties to the conflict. It forbade the use of ground troops by NATO and other coalition forces.
All of the above provisions were blantantly violated by NATO and other coalition forces. For example, not only did NATO do nothing to protect the civilian population of Sirte from NTC bombardment, it joined in, causing hundreds of deaths and injuries to innocent civilians in this city, not to mention the tens of thousands driven out of their homes. All other provisions of UNSC 1970 were also either ignored or violated.
Where are those responsible for these deliberate violations of a UN Security Council Resolution going to be tried?
RichJames
20 November 2011 10:42PM
The Hague must surely be the most fit place - it is important that Gaddafi is treated with the due process and decency that he and his father often denied to others. Compassion counts for little if it is only reserved for those who are pleasant; and it would be a bitter irony of one perpetration of human rights violations were followed by yet more. It would also be highly hypocritical for the new Libyan authorities to put him on trial given the war crimes they themselves have committed; whilst the governments of Britain and America were willing to work with Colonel Gaddafi's regime while it committed numerous crimes and abuses of human rights.
So yes - I think the Hague is the only place where justice can really be meted out with fairness, integrity, and in-keeping with the humane standards international law is designed to maintain.
Billy2heads
20 November 2011 10:45PM
Makes no difference where it is it will be a charade. If there was any real justice then cameron, Fox, Hague and Sarcozy and a few others from NATO would be in the dock facing the same charges alongside him......
EdwardGibbo
20 November 2011 10:48PM
I think he should be tried by the ICC because it is simply not possible for him to get a fair trial in Libya. The reports of alleged Rebel War Crimes (revenge killings, Gadaffi senior's death, etc.) should also be thoroughly investigated and anyone suspected of wrongdoing should also be sent to the ICC because they wouldn't get a "fair" trial in Libya, either.
Whether we crossed any legal boundaries during our own "intervention" is perhaps a subject for another day
killerontheroad
20 November 2011 10:51PM
I can already see the list of character witnesses for the defence:
Tony Blair
Peter Mandelson
Nat Rothschild
Alex Salmond
Sir Howard Davies
Lord Desai
Sir Mark Allen
BP Chief Executive
Nelly Furtado
David Held
Several useful idiots.
Mrdaydream
20 November 2011 10:52PM
The Libyan PM has already said that Saif will be tried in Libya. So you can forget them sending him to the Hague; it's not going to happen.
The lynching of Gaddafi senior was a disgrace, for which on present showing no-one will be held to account. It simply isn't good enough to say that these things happen, siege of Misrata, etc etc. There's already been an attempt at a cover-up, and when Saif is given a show trial it will be the same thing without the violence and the mobile phone footage.
I don't like the guy. I think his weird TV appearance in February -- the speech that launched a thousand shoes -- was partly responsible for setting the rebels on the path of no return. But being an idiot and the son of a dictator are neither of them hanging matters, and he will be hung, no question.
If these events are tests of the claims of the new Libya to be considered as a democracy, fully embracing justice and the rule of law, it has failed in both cases.
RichJames
20 November 2011 10:54PM
GregCallus:
The ICC does not have jurisdiction for Saif Gadaffi's crimes. The ICC does not have jurisdiction for Saif Gadaffi's crimes. At all.
There is nothing in the document you link to which exempts Saif Gaddafi from the International Criminal Court. It refers to the sanctions brought against Libya during the outbreak of hostilities in February. The rest of your comment is legalese cobblers.
Warrants were sought on the grounds of crimes against humanity - suspects do not have to agree to be prosecuted. I can't say anymore because the mods will zap me for discussing legal issues, but the Guardian themselves have discussed it:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/16/gaddafis-war-crimes-suspects?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487
As have the Telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8901464/International-Criminal-Court-demands-Libya-hand-over-captured-Saif-al-Islam.html
killerontheroad
20 November 2011 10:55PM
Possible trial locations:
The Hague (the Dutch one, not William)
Tripoli
One of Tony Blair's more accommodating properties in his extensive portfolio
Peter Mandelson's pad in Notting Hill
A country manor in Berkshire
The LSE lecture theatre or senior common room...
jaapdenhaan
20 November 2011 11:05PM
Perhaps in The Hague, that he also prefers it should play no role in keeping him in Libya. There is always an unexpected beautiful feel when people like Karadzic and so on arrive in Holland, the Dutch need that, it gives meaning in life. There is anyway an unpresuming background I discussed, I see bearing relevance to the tale, concluding it.
exsanddancer
20 November 2011 11:10PM
I cant recall all this whimpering for an ICC trial when Saddam was tried in Iraq and hung on camera. Let him taste Libyan justice.
exsanddancer
20 November 2011 11:12PM
And I dont recall Osama Bin Laden getting much of a trial either when he was captured by the American forces.
Mrdaydream
20 November 2011 11:19PM
Crimes of which Saif al Islam could fairly be accused:
Crimes against art (for the rubbishy sub-surrealist paintings he has inflicted on the world)
Aesthetic vandalism (for the decor of his apartment in Sirte)
Crimes against grooming (for making the fatal upside-down error of matching a full black beard with a dome as bald as an egg)
Disastrously bad political judgement (for his tv interview in February)
Hubris.
Vanity.
Embarrassingly silly rhetoric (eg his plans A B and C speech)
The sins of the father.
That's about it.
MarkThomason
20 November 2011 11:19PM
What matters to me is that his trial be long and detailed enough to fully explore the things in which he participated or of which he had knowledge at the time--from the many crimes and deals of Lockerbie through renditions for Libya's torture services and on to arms sales and oil deals. The archives have been seized, the insiders are as young as they will ever be and now free to talk, and this is our best chance to clean house as to all concerned. It must be done.
The question is, where is this most likely to happen? The ICC tends to long trials, but it is run by the West, and it is the West that now needs to hide so much. The Libyans do not have the experience of such events, but they have the material to hand and they have reason to spread the blame rather than keep it all in Libya.
On balance, the important interests are more likely to be served in Libya rather than under Western supervision, despite the risks they will bungle it all and shoot him out of hand. If they do, then a truth commission type inquiry inside Libya would be needed, and it would be better if the West had not already run a coverup to cite constantly when the truth starts to leak out.
GeorgeClooneyLover
20 November 2011 11:20PM
What exactly is Saif supposed to be guilty of in the first place?? Being on the losing side in a civil war? Well, I say civil, but the Libyan army were really up against Qatari special forces and NATO bombers as well as armed insurgents.
A choice between sending someone to be tried by a bunch of pompous idiots and political pawns in Brussels (Moreno-Ocampo and his cronies) or a Libyan kangaroo court with a near-certain death sentence waiting at the end of it is no choice at all; Saif should go to the Hague for his own safety and because he’ll very probably be found not guilty.
At least that amateurish media-whore Moreno Ocampo (who spent the entirety of the war blabbing on and on to media agencies about his still as of yet undisclosed evidence of “massive rape” and Viagra in Libya) won’t behead him or strap him to the front of a car bonnet and drive around Benghazi shouting "Allahu Akbar".
Mrdaydream
20 November 2011 11:27PM
I missed out a few of Saif's alleged crimes, sorry.
Plagiarism and fraud (for his LSE PhD thesis)
Deception (for posing as a democrat)
Crimes of association (for being one of the Friends of New Labour)
I think only the last of these is anything approaching a hanging matter.
Mrdaydream
20 November 2011 11:31PM
One more crime.
Being on the losing side.
diddoit
20 November 2011 11:31PM
After the experience in Iraq, with the "Hanging judge" and then the barbarous execution of Saddam Hussein, Libya would be well advised to show a more civilized face to the world. Plus any repeat risks stoking tensions.
yesbutiwantmore
20 November 2011 11:34PM
He should be put on trial in Papua New Guinea.
johnmrson
20 November 2011 11:36PM
He should be tried wherever Libya want him to be tried.
yesbutiwantmore
20 November 2011 11:37PM
Response to nega9000, 20 November 2011 9:23PM
He quite plainly should be tried in Libya.
His crimes were against Libyans, and it is to them he owes restitution.
Not quite got the concept of a trial, have you?
newbridge
20 November 2011 11:41PM
Saif's trial should take place in Libya,and with the possible sentences involved.
A free Libya is surely entitled to run it;s own affairs,do the E.U. the U.N.,western liberals think that they have a veto on the Libyan criminal code?If so where else,oil.gas,foreign,spending,taxation.education, to name a few?Is a democracy by-pass the next step?
If Saif Gaddafi is convicted ,sentenced to death and executed it is an internal matter for Libyans,not for outsiders to decide.
unsouthbank
20 November 2011 11:44PM
exsanddancer
I cant recall all this whimpering for an ICC trial when Saddam was tried in Iraq and hung on camera. Let him taste Libyan justice.
Fine, I assume you recommend the same for all the hundreds of others, particularly on the "rebel" side of this civil war, who have been accused of various crimes, such as murder, that they all be peremptorily strung up without bothering with the nuisance of a fair trial?
yesbutiwantmore
20 November 2011 11:46PM
There is a third possibility, if Libya's government really does want to try him in the country under its own law and procedure: under the principle of complementarity, which may give national courts a first bite, the government may have to persuade the ICC judges it truly is able to prosecute him under fair trial conditions for the international crimes for which the international arrest warrant was issued.
So, there's a chance he could be acquitted of all charges? In which case, he could later run for President?
Can we please dispense with all this trial and justice nonsense?
yesbutiwantmore
20 November 2011 11:47PM
Cue Jack Ruby in a turban.
unsouthbank
21 November 2011 12:01AM
newbridge
If Saif Gaddafi is convicted ,sentenced to death and executed it is an internal matter for Libyans,not for outsiders to decide.
So, where do NATO, The UN Security Council, The Arab League, The UK, France, The USA, Qatar, Italy, The ICC etc. etc. come into the picture?
They have all been fairly heavily involved in this affair up until now don't you think?
So it now, somehow, becomes an entirely internal matter for Libyans only to deal with?
Isn't it a bit late for that?
Oh and by the way, what happens if he is acquitted? - You seem to have forgotten about that possibility.
chockychocky
21 November 2011 12:02AM
He's going to end up the fall guy for his father's excesses, whatever happens to him.
tomedinburgh
21 November 2011 12:06AM
It's pretty simple - the Libyans should hang him for murder, then hand over the body to the ICC to try for crimes against humanity.
In this situation there really isn't any doubt about guilt and innocence: the crimes are totally public and involve thousands of deaths of a period of decades. The Libyans should find one murder where the evidence is particularly straightforward and try and punish him under local laws. Why should someone who kills one person in Libya get hung when someone who kills thousands gets a ten year trial followed by life imprisonment in excellent conditions in Holland.
All an ICC trial would achieve is a decade long taxpayer funded bonanza for tens of lawyers racking up hundreds of pounds an hour in fees.
TheotherWay
21 November 2011 12:08AM
" Where should Saif Gaddafi be put on trial?
The new Libya is keen to show it can deliver justice, but The Hague judges will have to be involved"
Why? Hague proved itself to be unequal to the task when it took charge of the Slobodan Milošević trial. He cocked a snoop at it, the justice and infinitely worse, his victims. It may have all been a very lucrative and enjoyable experience for everyone who earned their fees but not for the vicitims.
Now we have Saif Gaddafi. Overwhelming victims are the Libyans. The law and the environment have been the product of forty years of the Gaddafi regime which Mr Saif Gaddafi was one of the chief men at the top. It these circumstance, it is but fair that Libyans put them ion trial.
By this I do not say Hague has nothing to do. They can still follow the trail of money and ivvestigate and prosecute the collaborators of the old Libyan regime who were leading lights and power Brokers in the West. That would be a far greater contribution from the Hague and would prove a greater contribution to justice rather than the parasited in the West to go Scot free.
truebluetah
21 November 2011 12:14AM
Response to GregCallus, 20 November 2011 9:51PM
Article 13 via Chapter VII of the UN Charter gives the UN Security Council the right to refer a UN member state, but the preamble of Article 13 -
The Court may exercise its jurisdiction with respect to a crime referred to in article 5 in accordance with the provisions of this Statute if:
- suggests this is effective only when the Court already has jurisdiction under the statute (and the UNSC merely acts to instigate proceedings in place of the State Party).
That's not what it's been understood to mean by the UNSC, the ICC itself or experts in public international law (like the author of the piece). I'm not 100% on why but I'd imagine it's because a) what you describe wasn't what the drafters intended and b) article 14 and 15 require referring state parties and the prosecutor to only refer/investigate crimes where there's jurisdiction. No such requirement is put on the UNSC.
claxton1968
21 November 2011 12:14AM
Saif Gaddafi must be tried at the ICC.Only there will there be a fair trial.The unlawful torture and murder of his father and the thousands of other pro -Gaddafi supporters(god knows what horrors are going on right now in the detention centres.)prove beyond any doubt what will happen to Saif if he stays in Libya.What the NTC need to understand is that without Nato's 25000 bombing missions,the gaddafi regime would still rule Libya.And since the member Countries that make up Nato subscribe to the Geneva Convention and the ICC the very least the NTC should do is let Saif be tried at the Hague.
unsouthbank
21 November 2011 12:17AM
MrDayDream
One more crime.
Being on the losing side.
Thanks. You finally got round to it. In the real world it's the only one that really counts. If you are on the winning side, of course, you are not only automatically innocent of all crimes, you have the luxury of deciding who, how, where, and when the losers are going to be tried, found guilty and eliminated.
benedek1
21 November 2011 12:18AM
Response to Berchmans, 20 November 2011 8:55PM
how would be a trial fair organised by the very rapists and killers and traitors???
ICC is not better, NATO has to answer to genocide and not Saif al islam Gaddafi
benedek1
21 November 2011 12:19AM
Response to TimMiddleton, 20 November 2011 8:56PM
justice would be if USA and France and UK would pay damages to the 100 000 victims of the NATOgenocide in Libya
claxton1968
21 November 2011 12:25AM
Saif Gaddafi must be tried at the ICC.Only there will there be a fair trial.The unlawful torture and murder of his father and the thousands of other pro -Gaddafi supporters(god knows what horrors are going on right now in the detention centres.)prove beyond any doubt what will happen to Saif if he stays in Libya.What the NTC need to understand is that without Nato's 25000 bombing missions,the gaddafi regime would still rule Libya.And since the member Countries that make up Nato subscribe to the Geneva Convention and the ICC the very least the NTC should do is let Saif be tried at the Hague.
benedek1
21 November 2011 12:26AM
savages here cry for Saif to be burnt at the stake, well done back to Middle ages, believing anything the mouthpiece of army says and want revenge for crimes not committed by this man, but your very own leaders! if anyone then Sarkozy, Obama, Cameron should be tried.
claxton1968
21 November 2011 12:28AM
Saif Gaddafi must be tried at the ICC.Only there will there be a fair trial.The unlawful torture and murder of his father and the thousands of other pro -Gaddafi supporters(god knows what horrors are going on right now in the detention centres.)prove beyond any doubt what will happen to Saif if he stays in Libya.What the NTC need to understand is that without Nato's 25000 bombing missions,the gaddafi regime would still rule Libya.And since the member Countries that make up Nato subscribe to the Geneva Convention and the ICC the very least the NTC should do is let Saif be tried at the Hague.
benedek1
21 November 2011 12:28AM
Response to claxton1968, 21 November 2011 12:25AM
why shuld he be tried at all? because daddy says so? wakey wakey people!!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3SU9qUAkSg
benedek1
21 November 2011 12:29AM
Response to unsouthbank, 21 November 2011 12:17AM
exactly
i recommend Lizzy Phelan's testimony:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3SU9qUAkSg
unsouthbank
21 November 2011 12:30AM
tomedinburgh
It's pretty simple - the Libyans should hang him for murder, then hand over the body to the ICC to try for crimes against humanity.
Yes, and I assume you suggest the same procedure for all the hundreds of those on the "rebel" or "NTC" side of the conflict who have been accused of murder and other crimes?
Let's just string the whole lot of them up and have done with it, don't you agree?
All this nonsense about "fair trials" and ridiculous concepts such as "justice" !
They're just bloody nuisances, aren't they?
benedek1
21 November 2011 12:30AM
there is already an indictment against NATO on Monday, at the wrong court though (icc) that is a maffia mickey court
benedek1
21 November 2011 12:31AM
Response to unsouthbank, 21 November 2011 12:30AM
do not forget that all RAF pilots should stand trial, that killed tens of thousands with cluster bombs!
houses
21 November 2011 12:42AM
The Hague is a joke.
Where are the arrest warrants for Tony Blair, George W Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, Barack Obama, Hilary Clinton, David Cameron. Nicolas Sarkozy... etc etc etc
unprogressive
21 November 2011 12:53AM
He should be tried in any place that will allow the details of the deals struck between Blair, Mandelson and Gaddafi Snr to be made public.
yesbutiwantmore
21 November 2011 1:02AM
Response to TheotherWay, 21 November 2011 12:08AM
He cocked a snoop at it
Snook. He cocked a snook.
Lest the corruption take hold.
benad361
21 November 2011 1:06AM
In Libya. We have to let the Libyan people make their own choices. A new and free Libya is fundamentally entitled to do so, and the Libyan people seem to want to unanimously want this. Therefore, let them handle this affair.
Tarik1967
21 November 2011 1:49AM
He is a Libyan who committed crimes in Libya against Libyans. Why on earth should the trial be held anywhere else than Libya?
DaveRogers
21 November 2011 1:57AM
Saif Aln Islam committed his crimes in Libya, the Libyan Courts are capable of trying him and should do.
The ICC is all very well if a scumbag can't face domestic justice but that is not the case here and headline seeking grandstanding Human Rights types should stay out of it.
Try him in Libya by Libyans
houses
21 November 2011 2:01AM
Response to DaveRogers, 21 November 2011 1:57AM
Hm. Isn't that what they said about Sadam - try him in Iraq. And look how that turned out - the trial was ajoke and the execution a scandal.
Chicothecat
21 November 2011 2:11AM
It looks as though the ICC have jurisdiction over the crimes that Saif (allegedly) committed after the outbreak of the revolt, but the Libyans may want to try him for other matters; crimes that he committed while the West were looking the other way. And they should have the right to do that. However it's not certain that Libya has in place the legal mechanisms yet to properly try a case like this. Whatever, we should hope that Saif can be persuaded to answer the questions about Libya's dealings with the West (Lockerbie in particular); he may know more about this than even his father. If that means sending him to the Hague so be it. We don't want any quick, sham trial followed by a firing squad.
Lapchick
21 November 2011 2:13AM
Please tell me what are his "crimes against humanity"? What about those f***ers who killed his father. Will they be brought to trial? Did Osama Bin Laden have a trial? It is whatever suits the USA, that is what will happen.
JohnCan45
21 November 2011 2:22AM
The ICC can have him once the Libyan people are done with him.
BABELrevisited
21 November 2011 2:36AM
Send him to the same court that the failed bankers were sent to.
DaveRogers
21 November 2011 2:38AM
Response to houses, 21 November 2011 2:01AM
Hm. Isn't that what they said about Sadam - try him in Iraq. And look how that turned out - the trial was ajoke
No, the trial was far from a joke
and the execution a scandal.
according to the Iraqis I know the only scandal ws that he could only be executed once and that it was over too quickly
BABELrevisited
21 November 2011 2:43AM
Our tony should offer his services to defend Saif. Tony is the Middle East Peace envoy after all. Any evidence of his alleged crimes should be thoroughly tested, the Western press can be very creative when it comes to regime change but gave us little information covering the Nato blanket bombing campaign although it was pursued for months on end. The resultant dead from this action will never be recorded.
paperchase
21 November 2011 3:54AM
Crimes against humanity are prosecuted only if you lose and if the West decides it doesn't find you useful any more. Victor's selective justice.
retsdon
21 November 2011 4:11AM
He's not going to get justice anyway.
Libya? It doesn't have laws anymore - unless you include Brigand's Law. The Hague? Wih a few minor exceptions, it's a venue for political showtrials of third world upstarts on the losing side of wars against western interests.
The whole thing is a sick joke.
SamuelVis
21 November 2011 4:48AM
Everybody knows that Saif won't find justice in Tripoli nor in Hague. We all have been watching NATO hunt for his father and NATO supported barbarians' 'justice'.
Nobody will see justice anyway, USA pushed the World back to medieval ages of tortures, political killings and the right to blame losers.
Hague, however will be preferable, because there is slightest chance to hear truth about UK, France and US elite dirty affairs.
But thus is the exact reason why this trial won't be in Hague. Clinton, Sarkosy, Cameron don't want this risk. Therefore this question - 'Where should Saif Gaddafi be put on trial?' - is rather rhetorical brainwashing question.
Chân thành cám ơn Quý Anh Chị ghé thăm "conbenho Nguyễn Hoài Trang Blog"
Xin được lắng nghe ý kiến chia sẻ của Quý Anh Chị trực tiếp tại Diễn Đàn Paltalk: 1Latdo Tapdoan Vietgian CSVN Phanquoc Bannuoc .
Kính chúc Sức Khỏe Quý Anh Chị .
conbenho
Tiểu Muội quantu
Nguyễn Hoài Trang
21112011
___________
CSVN là TỘI ÁC
Bao che, dung dưỡng TỘI ÁC là đồng lõa với TỘI ÁC
No comments:
Post a Comment