15 October 2002
Text: U.S. Restates Objections to International Criminal Court
(U.S. statement to General Assembly Sixth Committee) (470)
United Nations -- In making the effort to ensure that U.S. citizens
are not brought before the International Criminal Court, the United
States does not seek to undermine the International Criminal Court,
the general counsel to the U.S. Mission to the United Nations said
October 14.
In a speech to the General Assembly's sixth committee, which deals
with legal matters, Nicholas Rostow explained the U.S. position on the
court.
"The United States is concerned about the danger of politically
motivated prosecutions," Rostow said. "Examples of investigations or
prosecutions based on political agenda, not evidence and neutral
prosecutorial judgement abound. The structure of the ICC makes such
unacceptable proceedings possible."
Rostow also said that the Rome Statute, which established the ICC,
provides insufficient opportunity for Security Council oversight.
United States has never recognized the right of an international
organization to try non-citizens without Security Council mandate or
oversight, he noted.
Following is the text of Rostow's remarks:
(begin text)
The reasons for U.S. opposition to the Rome Statute as finally adopted
are well known. I shall restate the fundamental points today.
First, however, let me reiterate that the United States does not seek
to undermine the International Criminal Court. We respect the right of
states to become parties to the Rome Statute if they wish. At the same
time, our decision not to be a party also should be respected.
Our position has three principal parts.
First, the United States is concerned about the danger of politically
motivated prosecutions. Examples of investigations or prosecutions
based on political agenda, not evidence and neutral prosecutorial
judgment, abound. The structure of the ICC makes such unacceptable
proceedings possible. A prosecutor's office, housed in a
democratically responsible political branch of government, perforce is
democratically accountable in a system of checks and balances. This
situation will not exist in the ICC.
Second, as we stated before this body last year, the ICC has problems
in the related areas of jurisdiction and due process. The power of
this international tribunal is independent of consent. While
sovereigns have the right to try non-citizens who have committed
offenses against their citizens or on their territory, the United
States has never recognized the right of an international organization
to do so absent consent or a UN Security Council mandate and Security
Council oversight. The ICC lacks all three. In addition, the Rome
Statute raises, but does not satisfactorily answer, due process
concerns. These include issues of multiple jeopardy, definitions of
crimes, and problems of evidence and testimony when the Court has to
harmonize various legal systems and languages.
Finally, the ICC is not part of the UN Charter system. The Rome
Statute provides insufficient opportunity for Security Council
oversight. And, the Assembly of States Parties is wrestling with the
definition of aggression, a matter left to the Security Council by the
UN Charter.
For the all these reasons, among others, the United States cannot join
consensus.
(end text)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
