Comment on: Conveniently Colonial – AFRICOM As Enforcer For the ICC

Courtesy: http://lawiscool.com/2009/05/29/could-george-w-bush-be-charged-with-war-crimes/

Conveniently Colonial – AFRICOM As Enforcer For the ICC

… the proposed US ‘engagement’ with the ICC would thus allow the US to declare itself above international law while using international law for its own interests.
… just as the US invokes counter-terrorism as a basis for military assistance to African states, it may come to use international justice enforcement to justify increased militarisation of select African armies. … the US prefers to rely on proxies to carry out its military agenda... More...

COMMENT: US HYPOCRISY ANS DOUBLE-STANDARDS OBNOXIOUS!
Ever so pertinent, Xcroc! Thanks a lot for this latest exposure of an insufferable hypocrisy and double standards! It should be obvious to all that this is a strange set of circumstances. Whilst the US is offering their services to arrest African suspects for the ICC, they still keep on their statue books, a law that authorizes the US to raid Den Haag and free US covered United States or allied persons.

Lawiscool writes on his blog: "The United States is not a signatory, and it was Bush himself who instead of ratifying the ICC actually had America’s signature removed.  His rationale was “politicized prosecutions and investigations” could result in Americans being brought before the ICC."

The fact that it brings Africans before the ICC does not seem to bother anyone even if there is the same fear of the politicisation of the process!

Robert Marquand of the CSM describes the implications of the US Act:

    "Formally titled the American Service Members Protection Act, the measure is widely and derisively known here as the Invasion of The Hague Act.

    Odd as it may seem, the law allows the US to constitutionally send jack-booted commandos to fly over fields of innocent tulips, swoop into the land of wooden shoes, tread past threatening windmills and sleepy milk cows into the Dutch capital – into a city synonymous with international law – and pry loose any US troops.

    Today, the Dutch mostly treat the issue as a joke, a cowboy American moment. But it is widely felt that if President Barack Obama’s foreign policy team wants to achieve a symbolic break with the previous White House, it could rescind the invasion law.

    As a Dutch Ministry of Justice official put it, “I wouldn’t overstate how seriously we take this any more, but it does seem a bizarre symbol.” (See: Could George W. Bush Be Charged With War Crimes?)

 According to  "SEC. 2008. AUTHORITY TO FREE MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES AND CERTAIN OTHER PERSONS DETAINED OR IMPRISONED BY OR ON BEHALF OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT",

   "1. AUTHORITY- The President is authorized to use all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any person described in subsection (b) who is being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court.

   2. PERSONS AUTHORIZED TO BE FREED- The authority of subsection (a) shall extend to the following persons:

         1. Covered United States persons.

         2. Covered allied persons.

         3. Individuals detained or imprisoned for official actions taken while the individual was a covered United States person or a covered allied person, and in the case of a covered allied person, upon the request of such government."

Apparently, it does not bother the Americans that we in Africa are also apprehensive “politicized prosecutions and investigations”

Needless to say that such moves must be opposed!

Forward Ever! Backwards Never!!!

Cheers!
--
Nana Akyea Mensah, The Odikro.
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/people/Nana-Akyea-Mensah
Blog: http://nanaakyeamensah.blogspot.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/TheOdikro