Re: Judgement at Malaysian hearing may help push case at ICC; Obama in violation for not pursuing indictment

Where does Obama's private, world "kill" list enter into any of these
legalities?

Obama can drone anyone he dislikes and all those innocents around
whatever victim Obama choses with his drones..

On May 31, 7:05 am, OccupySpring <soprano.olivi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Francis Boyle is a Professor of Law at the University of llinois
> School of Law, where he currently teaches courses on Public
> International Law and International Human Rights.  * I would say he is
> the EXPERT on this issue*
>
> JAY: So how were you able to get something going at the ICC, and where
> is it at?
>
> BOYLE: Right. Well, numerous complaints have been filed against Bush
> and the rest of them at the International Criminal Court, but they got
> nowhere, because the United States government is not a party to the
> Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court. And I was the first
> one to figure out a way around this conundrum by filing a complaint
> against Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Gonzalez, Bybee, Yoo, Tenet,
> and Rice for their policy of so-called extraordinary rendition, which,
> as I pointed out to the ICC, is really a euphemism for the enforced
> disappearance of human beings and torture, both of which are Rome
> Statutory crimes. And as I pointed out to the ICC, these defendants
> have committed Rome Statutory crimes in Rome party states. Indeed most
> of Europe, where these extraordinary renditions in part took place,
> are parties to the Rome statute, as well as Afghanistan. And therefore
> I argued to the ICC that the court did have jurisdiction to prosecute
> them and should exercise that jurisdiction.
>
> JAY: Well, how has the ICC responded to your arguments?
>
> BOYLE: They responded to me saying they gave me a docket number, they
> were inquiring into the matter, and they would get back to me in
> writing
>
> JAY: Right. Now, what is the obligation, if any, on the Obama
> administration in regards to all of this? I mean, when President Obama
> was elected, he said it's time to look forward, not back, which, you
> know, a lot of people have suggested that would mean no crimes of any
> kind would ever be punished, 'cause it's always happened already. But
> is there any legal obligation on the Obama administration to
> investigate/prosecute? And if so, the fact that they haven't, what
> does that mean?
>
> BOYLE: Yes, the Obama administration has all along had an obligation
> to prosecute Bush and the rest of them under the Convention against
> Torture, including U.S. implementing legislation for that convention,
> making torture a crime, a felony, and in some circumstances punishable
> by death if death has occurred, which it has, although I don't support
> the death penalty. But it does give you an idea of the severity of the
> crimes. And also the Obama administration has an obligation to
> prosecute these individuals under the four Geneva conventions of 1949,
> including the U.S. implementing legislation, the U.S. War Crimes Act.
> So there is an obligation by Obama to prosecute. Perhaps in a second
> term they might. We'll just have to see what happens.
>
> You are correct to indicate that so far they said they were looking to
> the forward and not to the past. I pointed out then to the ICC
> prosecutor that this is definitive proof that the Obama administration
> is not going to prosecute at this time and therefore satisfies the
> element known as subsidiarity, which requires the ICC to defer to the
> national state for prosecution before the ICC steps in. And if you
> already have Obama and Holder saying they're not going to prosecute,
> that satisfies that requirement and puts it firmly in the hands of the
> ICC.
>
> JAY: And is the Obama administration then itself in violation of the
> law by not pursuing this?
>
> BOYLE: That's correct. It's clearly in violation of the Convention
> against Torture and the four Geneva conventions of 1949, and, I regret
> to report, technically this would make them accessories after the fact
> to these offenses.
>
> http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3...

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
To post to this group, send email to OpenDebateForum@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to OpenDebateForum-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum?hl=en