Written by Bwire Stephen Thursday, 01 July 2010 14:37
ICC for weaker parties only?
Dr. David Hoile, who claims to be a public affairs consultant specialising in African affairs asserts that the ICC has turned out to be one of the nastier manifestations of globalization with what appears to be an almost exclusive focus on Africa.
He has authored a book: "The International Criminal Court; Europe's Guantamo bay?"
In his book, Hoile dismisses the ICC as a new form of imperialism created by the West and put in place only for African countries- only for poor countries.
He further documents Prof. Mahamood Mamdani's opinion that the ICC reflects colonialism, slavery and imperialism created and funded by the West to punish regimes that do not seem to accord them undisturbed access to their resources.
Hoile cites cases such as Iraq, Afghanistan and Gaza where the ICC has turned a blind eye in the midst of systematic killings, bombings, rape, torture and other such cruel treatments by American occupational forces and their Western allies.
He argues that former US President George Bush, for example, and his erstwhile ally, former British Premier Tony Blair have not been brought to book; in spite of the glaring fact that their unilateral decision to invade Iraq has caused unprecedented suffering to the innocent people of that country.
The same applies to Afghanistan. This, argues Hoile, is a clear indication that the ICC is only there to punish weaker parties while the superior powers remain unfettered to do what they want.
ICC judges incompetent?
Hoile writes that most of the ICC presiding judges are incompetent, and that they were elected to the ICC bench without prior experience as judges in their respective countries.
He adds that in the ICC, one has a Court whose judges are appointed not because they are the best legal minds in the world, but because of back-room vote-trading.
He asserts that some are appointed because it is a cosy retirement job; some are "washed-up" politicians, some are diplomats and others are appointed because their governments pay the ICC a lot of money.
"We have judges making critical rulings who have never been lawyers, let alone judges. We have judges who have pressed for legal indictments on the basis of what they have seen on CNN.
We have judges who cite Greek mythology to justify prolonging Africa's civil wars rather than put peace before selectively retributive European law," he submits.
He brings to light a November 2009 memorandum to the ICC Assembly of States Parties in which Human Rights Watch said: "We have advocated in previous judicial elections that states parties should resist the practice of "vote-trading"…vote-trading over ICC positions could lead to the election of poorly qualified judges, and hence to a bench that will not be the most skilled and representative." In the memorandum, Human Rights Watch urged states parties to put aside narrow interests and vote only for the most highly qualified judges.
Hoile cites the election of Japanese Judge Fumiko Saiga as a perfect example of incompetence at the ICC bench. Fumiko was appointed as an ICC Judge in late 2007 after Japan became the biggest single contributor to the ICC.
He documents that between 2003 and 2007, Fumiko served as the Japanese Ambassador to Norway and Iceland, and was also Japan's Ambassador with responsibility for Human Rights from 2005, and that she also had considerable experience in Japan's relations with the United Nations.
Hoile categorically states that Fumiko had no legal training or judicial experience at the time she was pushed to ICC.
And Ocampo?
Hoile alleges that even ICC Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo's moral and legal record is questionable.
He argues that Ocampo has shown scant respect across the board for legal procedures and due process, and that he demonstrated his contempt for legal process by leaving his own courtroom half-way through the opening day of the ICC's first-ever trial (at a cost of half-a-billion Euros) to attend the Davos World Economic Forum to rub shoulders with fellow celebrities such as Brad Pitt, Michael Douglas and Angelina Jolie, who are Hollywood celebrities.
He continues that even when Ocampo is in court, he spends time texting on his mobile phone, which is a gross abuse of court procedure.
He also mentions Ocampo's alleged sexual misconduct while on ICC-business trip to South Africa, in which Ocampo is reported to have coerced a South African journalist, who had been arranged by Ocampo's spokesperson for an interview with the Chief Prosecutor, into sexual intercourse in return for her car keys.
Hoile writes that for all the claims made about the ICC's independence from political considerations, Ocampo's appointment was itself intensely political.
He quotes British legal commentator Joshua Rosenberger who states that "Ocampo was appointed ICC prosecutor because the European Union-funded ICC did not want Africans to be prosecuted by a Western European".
Ocampo blundered on Lubanga's case?
Hoile highlights that the legal competence of Ocampo in the preparations for the Lubanga case has been questioned across the board.
He adds that the ICC has made a series of legal blunders and abuses of due process, and that given Ocampo's well-documented obsession with micromanaging every detail of every case, he is clearly responsible for such blunders.
The landmark, first-ever trial held by the International Criminal Court began on 26 January 2009, after several years of preparation and at much expense. The ICC Trial Chamber1, comprising Judges Sir Adrian Fulford, Elisabeth Odio Benito and Rene Blattman, commenced The Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo.
Thomas Lubanga was the commander of a rebel movement, Patriotic Forces for Liberation of the Congo (FPLC) that largely operated in the Ituri district of the Democratic Republic of Congo.
Hoile reveals that much of Ocampo's opening statement at the trial wasn't about child soldiers, but focused more on claims of rape and other sex claims- overlooking the fact that the accused had not been charged with those allegations. Lubanga was standing trial on charges of recruiting and arming child soldiers, which is a war crime.
He further notes that immediately after the charge-sheet was read, Lubanga's defence lawyer, Maitren Catherine Mabille, complained pointing out that rape was not among the crimes her client was being arraigned for.
It is reported that Ocampo then left the courtroom without listening to the defence's opening statement to attend the World Economic Forum in Switzerland, an act which observers said, was an abuse and contempt of court and due process. The trial was suspended to-date.
According to Hoile, the Chief Prosecutor, therefore, was not present in court to witness his prosecution being tripped up almost immediately when their first witness, a former child soldier known as Dieumerci, giving testimony from behind a screen and with his voice distorted, said that he had lied.
He adds that the young man told court that a humanitarian aid group had coached him on what to lie about. The court then went into closed session and dismissed him, prompting Lubanga's defence to complain arguing that the young man should be allowed to testify, since his reversal could benefit Lubanga.
The Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir became the first ever head of state to be indicted by the ICC. Bashir has since defied the ICC to appear in this event.
A mini-investigation made by The Sunrise indicates that Hoile is a Sudanese-based researcher and that his book came at the height of Bashir's indictment talks by the ICC.
We have also established that his media appearances in Kampala during which he attacked the ICC and its top personnel, was largely coordinated and sponsored by the Sudanese mission in Kampala. blog comments powered by Disqus
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
