international law
By Douglas Jones at Feb 12, 2008 |
|
For some time many have been trying to impeach gentlemen in America, since it is not signatory to the ICC, and in UK and Australia (and other countries?) to have the Rome statute, which a number of countries have incorporated into their own criminal code is not being used at least to test if we have war crimianls in our midst.
Reaction appears to be nil, though in passing one notes that criminal proceeding have been implemented against shall we say those not so well placed to avoid prosecution. A double standard is in operation. Australia is for example quite happy to bring a gentleman from the Solomon Islands, to have a charge heard in the intgerests of law and order, but apprently not other matters.
I would appreciate comments from readers as to why and what if anything can be done to implement the rule of law, so favoured by politicans seeking air time on national issues, but avoiding international issues relating to their own countrymen.
Might not instigation of prosecution, even if unsuccessful due to political power, indicte that the powerfull are at last culpable, despite the double standard, that internation law has a place in our belief in honesty integrity fairness and all the other things we pride ourselves in possessing and return a measure of usefulness to the UN, even make a climate in which much needed UN reform may take place?



By George, Justin at Feb 12, 2008 03:44 AM
Hi Douglas,
Your blog had some interesting questions, so I thought Id offer some of my quick musings on what you have written.
For me the answers to your questions may lie in examining the historical context of international law either in the long term or just in the last 5 or so years.
The long term one could look back to the creation of the UN, or even before that and examine the creation of the institutions and the international treaties and laws created, and how those with power influenced and swayed such a process. This would lead to international laws serving the interests of those with power in the international arena, and only being applicable when it does not contradict or interfere with those interests.
So I guess to truly implement international law without bias you would need to address those type of issues in regards to power, influence, enforcement, adherence etc
A shorter term view would see an example of the second Iraq War as to the lack of adherence and concern for international law. One could also look easily to how the powerful avoid laws within their own countries let alone internationally, due I would suspect again to similar reasons- structures that favour the rich and powerful and that disadvantage and punish the poor and less powerful.
I think that many things can be done that seeks alternatives and eventual replacements for such hierarchies and abuses of power internationally and internally, and that parallel institutions can be created internationally to give voice to those alternatives, to seek to hold those in power accountable. While such actions will have no widespread impact on the current situation, they do create the idea that change is possible and that other ways of doing are available. The other hope is that some of the international institutions being created inLatin America (while at the moment mostly trade related) might point towards ways that nation states might be able to create international agreements that more closely reflect values and aims of their populations.
So they were just some of the thoughts that came to me after reading your blog and the questions it poses. Hope they might give some more points to discuss further
Cheers
Justin
Reply this comment