@
BACK HOME
@


Greetings, I am a citizen from Hokkaido, Japan.

This is a message for American citizens who believe the terroism attacking WTC was NOT an "act of war" but an "inexcusable crime".

I understand US Government is trying to capture the alleged terrorist group by means which would NOT harm any Afganistan refugees.

Needless to say, the U.S. court CANNOT judge the criminals fairly because the U.S. is also the party concerned in the case.

So, I hope the provisioned International Criminal Court (ICC) will be established as soon as possible.

On 4 Oct 2001, the UK ratified the Rome Statute, followed recently by Swtizerland on Oct 12. Sixty (60) states need to ratify the Statute in order for the ICC to be established, and so far 43 has ratified it and 5 states are in pending status to become party to the Statute.

How about the U.S.? Please read the following excerpt from the CICC homepage. The CICC, or Coalition for International Criminal Court, is a New York-based UN-certified NGO working to establish the ICC.

CICC Homepage
-----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.igc.apc.org/icc/html/country.html#United%20States

Signature status: Signed on 31 December 2000

Membership: OAS, NAFTA

The fundamental objections of the United States to the Rome Statute were therefore reduced to a single key concern. The United States wants to be able to exempt its military and political officials and personnel from the jurisdiction of the Court until the United States has ratified the treaty. Attempts to obtain such an exemption were a priority for the previous administration at the Preparatory Commission for the ICC; nevertheless, former President Bill Clinton signed the Statute just before the 31 December 2000 deadline. Upon signing, former President Clinton said the treaty was "signficantly flawed", by which he was referring to the ongoing concern. He stated that the U.S. concern could best be addressed from inside the process and recommended to his successor that it not be ratified by the Senate.

The new Bush administration has been even more hostile to the ICC as a result of this potential for the Court's jurisdiction to apply to nationals of the U.S. before it had ratified. At the time of the September 11 attacks a policy review was underway and the options under consideration included "unsigning" and a global "anti-ratification" campaign. A small, low level US delegation attended only the debates on Aggression at the seventh session of the PrepCom (March 2001). It gave as its reason for absence that previous efforts to satisfy US concerns in UN negotiations on the ICC had been futile. Nevertheless, at the eighth session (24 September &endash; 5 October 2001), the delegation was larger, included higher level officials, and followed both Aggression and discussions on the Court's financing.

The current status of the internal policy review to determine the approach to the ICC, especially in light of the recent U.S. efforts to build coalition to fight against international terrorism, is unknown.
-----------------------------------------------------------

For the prevention of terrorism, the U.S. Government needs internatioal cooperation. Instead of resorting to military action, THE RULEL OF LAW needs to established.

I hope many people will take some action to establish the ICC.

Thank you.

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@     @


@@@BACK HOME

@
@