The International Criminal Court - World Nightmare

Like a Mississippi gambler, the UN has finally decided on a showdown, hoping it holds the winning cards in a risky game which is to unfold in Rome June 15 to July 17, 1998.

Nations concerned about national sovereignty and loss of cultural and religious rights have long been suspicious of the UN's aims and objectives. The UN, tired of being hedged in and restricted by these nations, is attempting to override them. It is doing so by way of a pre-emptive strike which involves the establishment of an International Criminal Court (ICC). The UN hopes such a court will finally give it firm control over the world's destiny, and provide the long-sought objective of what will be, in effect, a one-world government. It is significant that the World Federalist Movement is one of the leading non-government organizations (NGOs) promoting the ICC.

As usual, the UN and its supporters are presenting this court to the world as a noble deed, the purpose of which is to call to heel perpetrators of crimes against humanity such as the war crimes allegedly committed in the former Yugoslavia by Serb leader Radovan Karadzic and Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic, as well as those responsible for the terrible massacres in Rwanda. There is, at present, no permanent court to carry out this work -- only an ad hoc or temporary court established by the UN in 1994 to try these war criminals. UN supporters are arguing that the world absolutely requires a credible permanent court as a legitimate successor to the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal that was established immediately following World War II to try the perpetrators of the Nazis genocidal policies. In effect, the ICC would be a Numremburg court in perpetuity, but, significantly, it will be a court with much wider powers than those of the Nuremberg Tribunal. Also, the ICC will be markedly different from the present International Court of Justice in The Hague, which adjudicates only disputes between nations (not individuals) and whose rulings are only binding if the participating nations agree to be so bound.

To promote the urgency of the ICC, its supporters have used the death in April of Pol Pot, leader of the murderous Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, which from 1975 to 1979 caused the deaths of some 1.5 million Cambodians. The ICC promoters have expressed dissatisfaction that Pol Pot died in his own bed, of natural causes, before he could be brought to account before an earthly Bar of Justice. Who could possibly object to such a concern?

What is generally not mentioned publicly, however, is that it is intended that the ICC will not just be presiding over matters that are understood universally to be atrocities or crimes against humanity occurring during armed conflict, but also, over other matters as well. Therein lies the problem.

Rarely emphasized publicly outside UN confines, is the fact that the ICC is intended to deal with other violations of international human rights, including "gender crimes" which are to be considered as crimes against humanity.

At the Preparatory Committee hearings on the ICC held in New York in December 1997, the definition of war crimes was amended to include gender or sexual offences, defined as "... rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, enforced pregnancy, enforced sterilization and any other form of sexual violence ...". Mary Robinson, recently appointed head of the UN Human Rights Commission in Geneva, stated in a speech at the Human Rights Commissions hearings In Geneva in April, that "gender crimes" are particularly apt for inclusion in the ICC because of policies of mass rape during armed conflict. Forceable impregnation, according to Ms. Robinson, has been a particularly effective way of "tearing the social fabric", and gender sensitivity, prosecution and redress must be incorporated into the ICC. A more practicable explanation for the inclusion of the expression "enforced pregnancy" was also provided by the chairperson of the Women's Caucus at that same Commission hearings in Geneva. There, she stated that the word "abortion" was a highly divisive and controversial word at UN conferences. The use of this word has raised considerable problems when attempts have been made to include it in UN treaties. Therefore, the expression "enforced pregnancy" is to replace the word "abortion" in negotiations.

In this regard, it is significant that the American Civil Liberties Union and Planned Parenthood equated the term "forced pregnancy" with the denial of abortion-on-demand in a legal challenge brought against the Utah State abortion law in 1992. One of the drafters of this latter complaint was Janet Benshoof, of the American Civil Liberties Union, who also helped draft this UN-sanctioned phrase. In the Utah case, "enforced pregnancy" was described as "... forcing women to continue pregnancy against their will for the purpose of serving the state's declared interest in preserving unborn human life". This was characterized as "... an intolerable, dehumanizing form of servitude ...".

To ensure full acceptance of "enforced (or forced) pregnancy" as a war crime by the ICC, it is intended at this time that it be restricted to pregnancies occurring during times of armed conflict. Once the expression "forced pregnancy" has been accepted in armed conflict by the ICC, then the principle of abortion will have been accepted and acknowledged by the UN. It will then be a simple matter for the term to be extended to other UN documents in other situations, i.e. abortion-on-demand would be sanctioned world wide.

Canada's Contribution to the Foundation of the ICC

Canada, as usual, has taken a leading role in not only promoting the ICC, but also in including "forced pregnancy" in UN documents. Left-leaning Minister of Foreign Affairs, Lloyd Axworthy, eulogized the proposed court's virtues on March 30 in a speech at the UN's Human Rights Commission in Geneva. The Canadian delegation then promoted the expression "forced pregnancy" at the Commission's hearings, when, on April 21st, it sponsored an amendment to include "enforced pregnancy" as a human rights violation in armed conflict.

Canadians should also be aware that homosexual, NDP MP, Svend Robinson, long an advocate of abortion and homosexual rights, is included in the world-wide Parliamentarians' campaign to establish the ICC. Further, Canadians should also be aware that Fergus Watts, Executive Director of the World Federalists of Canada, is convenor of the Canadian Network for an International Criminal Court and has, in that capacity, been accredited as a non-government organization (NGO) to attend the Rome conference.

Concerns about the ICC

Fortunately, the concept of a permanent ICC has not been completely accepted by world nations. Some nations are hesitating for the very genuine reason that they do not want either their governments or their people to be made vulnerable to the vagaries of such a court. In this regard, it is significant that it is contemplated that complaints to the ICC could be initiated from a variety of sources, including individuals and NGOs. This would subject a nation's domestic policies to review and consideration by ICC judges. In effect, to accept an international court with such a broad mandate as that proposed by the UN is to surrender a significant part of a nation's sovereignty.

U.S. Concerns

Realizing it would have difficulty entirely halting the concept of the ICC, which is rapidly gaining steam and "apparent" public support (just trying to keep track of the continuous supportive articles planted world-wide is a full-time job), the US has now taken the position that no cases should be brought to the proposed ICC unless they have been first approved by the UN's Security Council. As it happens, the US has permanent veto power over the Security Council. This recommendation is hardly subtle, but it is, if accepted, an effective one.

Already, the campaign against the Security Council's interference with the ICC has begun. Canadian Judge, Madame Justice Louise Arbour, who was appointed a prosecutor of the International War Crime Tribunal in Yugoslavia in 1997, has entered the ring in defiance of Security Council control of the ICC. In a widely publicized interview published in Canada (Toronto Star, March 5, 1998) and abroad, she stated that Security Council control over the ICC would reduce it to a paper tiger. Feminist Mary Robinson, former President of Ireland (where she established and managed the referendums on divorce and abortion) and currently head of the Geneva-based UN Human Rights Commission, has also brought her prestigious office against the Security Council control of the ICC. Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister, Lloyd Axworthy, made it a point in his speech to the Human Rights Commission, on March 30, to reject any Security Council interference with the court.

Independent Prosecutor

What is being demanded by supporters of the ICC instead is an "independent prosecutor" who could initiate his/her own investigations and prosecutions and lay complaints without outside interference. It is proposed that the court would decide itself whether to take exclusive jurisdiction on a matter, even if a sovereign nation's court has already supposedly dealt with the matter. This position is based on the argument that genocide and crimes against humanity are usually committed with the complicity of a national government, and, therefore, such crimes must not be under the exclusive control of national courts. All nations must be bound by international custom or customary law, it is argued.

It is also troubling that once the ICC has been established, its mandate may to be extended beyond that of genocide, mass crimes and crimes against humanity, which are the proposals currently on the table. That it, it is being proposed that the ICC should not be limited to "war crimes", but that its jurisdiction should be extended to all crimes against humanity which, to date, the UN has not been able to enforce. The ICC is seen as the body to enforce not only a host of present international human rights, established in various UN treaties, but also the constantly evolving human rights. Such a court would then be able to effectively control the world's agenda.

So a world battle is about to take place. It will come to a head in Rome during five long weeks of negotiation.

REAL Women has received UN accreditation to attend this crucial conference. Please pray that the efforts of the many pro-life/family workers from around the world will be successful there. The journey to Rome is one of hope, not despair. We can make a difference.

Please also write to:

objecting to Canada's support of "enforced pregnancy" at the UN and the granting of such wide power to the ICC.

BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS