CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 3152
PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2004 9:43 am
 


The US is seeking to renew the immunity from prosecution enjoyed by American peacekeepers, with a resolution before the UN Security Council.
But human rights campaigners said the Iraq prison abuse scandal proves that the US needs to be held to account.

"Given the recent revelations... the US has picked one hell of a moment to ask for special treatment," said Richard Dicker of Human Rights Watch.

A number of Security Council members are expected to abstain from the vote.

Annual renewal

The US Deputy Ambassador to the UN, James Cunningham, insisted that those behind the abuse scandal would be "held fully accountable" by the US itself.

Washington negotiated special dispensation when the International Criminal Court came into being two years ago, arguing that as the world's only superpower, it might be subject to spurious or malicious prosecutions.

The US secured the UN's agreement by threatening to veto all its peacekeeping operations.

The exemption - which gives US soldiers immunity from international prosecution when serving on UN-backed missions - was passed in 2002 on an annual-renewal basis.

Last year, the vote passed 12-0, with France, Germany and Syria abstaining.

'Not automatic'

But after the revelations of torture in US-run prisons in Iraq, it is thought more countries may refuse to back the motion this time.

"There's growing opposition to this resolution and it's going to be reflected in an increase in the number of abstentions over last year", said Mr Dicker.

"Last year, it was more of an abstract question, but this year with the prisoner abuse scandal in Iraq it takes on a more sinister meaning."

The matter was due for discussion at the Security Council in New York on Friday.

But the vote has been delayed until Monday at the request of the Chinese UN ambassador, who is awaiting instructions from Beijing on how to vote.

The US needs nine votes for the resolution to be adopted - and no veto from the other four permanent members, Britain, France, China and Russia.

The current year's exemption ends in June. But last year, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan warned the renewal should not become an "annual routine."

Washington has also signed bilateral agreements with 89 countries to ensure they do not prosecute US personnel - although only 63 of those countries have been named publicly.

Only one country of the 63 is on the UN Security Council - the Philippines.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3736683.stm


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 8157
PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2004 9:49 am
 


You know, I wouldn't have a problem with immunity if the US was participating in a war the UN was backing. But seeing as how they just brushed the UN aside and decided to go it alone this time...


Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 9914
PostPosted: Tue May 25, 2004 10:52 am
 


Yeah, it would kinda suck if George and Donald were charged with being war criminals just before the election. Mind you, it would make the election more interesting, wouldn't it...... :wink:


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 6675
PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2004 4:04 am
 


It would be so good if the US lost its immunity. The rules of the ICC state very clearly that a country has the option of trying their own war criminals. It is only if the country cannot or will not do that that the ICC will step in. The whole idea of an immunity is wrong under those rules, and should never have been granted.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 19817
PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2004 7:38 am
 


I think that those soldiers should pay for what they did!!!
First, this war was illegal, and then they don't want to be accountable for "the actions of a few" (to quote Mr. Bush).

BTW. Did you guys know that there is a US soldier asking for refuge status in Canada. Vietnam all over again.

-M-


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 3152
PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2004 8:08 am
 


What's he asking for refugee status in Canada for?

And that's a cool avatar. There's a new British movie about to be released, a Thunderbirds movie, except it has real actors in it rather than puppets.


Offline
Forum Junkie
Forum Junkie
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 656
PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2004 8:16 am
 


Is it this guy?
http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=18779

He was given a year in prison (military prison at that, yikes!)


Offline
Junior Member
Junior Member
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 98
PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2004 8:36 am
 


Twila Twila:
Is it this guy?
http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=18779

He was given a year in prison (military prison at that, yikes!)

I hope he doesn't drop the soap... anyways, I think that's him because since they don't have the draft I can't think of anyone who would need refugee status, but if Bush has his way he's going to re-inact the draft after the next election and the new Canadians will be pouring in.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Montreal Canadiens
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 19817
PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2004 9:21 am
 


Thanks.. The movie is do out Jul 30th.

As of the soldier... it is another one who didn't what to go to Iraq. He moved the whole family and then applied for refuge.

Interesting to see what will come of it.
With the election starting, I wonder what kind of reporting it will get?

Just found this on google news-> http://www.cnw.ca/fr/releases/archive/M ... c7276.html

Got IT-> http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2004 ... 19-ap.html


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.