ICC or Libya, Who Should Try Gaddafi?

U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice Says Libya, ICC disagrees

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice has stated that it should be up to the new Libyan National Transitional Government (NTC) whether Muammar Gaddafi, once captured, is tried by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague, or in Libya.  This seems to me to be a rather strange statement, and apparently the ICC thinks so too.

Ambassador Rice asserted in an interview with CNN that "This is something that must be decided not by the United States or any other government, but by the people of Libya and by the interim transitional government that we expect will soon be constituted.  These are all choices that the Libyan people will ultimately have to make for them."

But the ICC disagrees with Ambassador Rice.  Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo reportedly has said that the Court, rather than Libyans, must make the decision on where Gaddafi and his fellow indictees will be tried.

The ICC opened its investigation into Libya after the situation was unanimously referred to the Court by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC).  The ICC issued arrest warrants on June 27th for Gaddafi, his son Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi and Abdullah Al-Sanousi, the Head of the Military Intelligence, for crimes against humanity after Prosecutor Ocampo's request was approved by the Court's Pre-Trial Chamber.  In order for a trial to be held in Libya instead of by the ICC, the principle of complementarity would have to be honored-in other words, the new government in Libya would have to show that it is both willing and able to try the defendants in their home country without ICC involvement.  Given the current state of the nation and its legal framework after four decades of Gaddafi's dictatorship, it seems unlikely to me that this standard could be met.

GlobalSolutions.org Executive Vice President Bob Enholm recently gave an interview on this topic to Talking Points Memo.  Some quotes from the article (click here to read the complete piece):

"(Enholm) noted that the ICC is based around the principle of "complementarity," meaning its purpose is to help nations perform complex trials that they would not be able to pull off on their own.

Using that principle, Enholm said, then there was a "rule of law-based path" down which the rebels might proceed. In hearings before any ICC trial began in earnest they could request the judges consider the trial be held in Libya by arguing the new national courts are either up to the job or better-suited for it.

However, Enholm said this path would be very different to a situation where the rebels "just say immediately the principle of complementarity applies" and schedule in-country trials without a dialogue with the ICC."

It will be interesting to see how all this plays out, but the ICC has certainly become a hot topic as Gaddafi's regime crumbles.  For those of us who support the Court, it's good to see that the ICC has helped to legitimize the concept that dictators cannot be allowed to attack civilians in their country with impunity, and that justice for these victims must be a priority of the international community.


Oh Yes...,the dogs of war, baying for other people's blood from a safe distance, want Gaddafi and family tried at the globalist star chamber at the Hague for the inevitable "crimes against humanity." Whatever Gaddafi has done, and it is the Libyans' business and no one else's, he looks like Little Mary Sunshine compared to Obama and Bush. Further, despite the inevitable demonization of an opponent, we can be absolutely sure of one thing: he is not being taken down for his sins, but rather for standing in the way of stealing oil, "securing the realm," and remaking the Arab world for the empire.

The Libyan legal system is currently not prepared, after four decades of dictatorship, to conduct the type of trial that would be needed for Gaddafi and his cohorts. They've been indicted by the ICC, the international body set up to handle these types of trials, at the request of the UN Security Council which called for an investigation. The Libyan situation was turned over to the ICC by the international community, and now the ICC should be allowed to do the work it was asked to do.

Yes, world government is such a wonderful idea. After all, western civilization and its secular militarists have been destroying the former Ottoman Empire for a couple hundred years or so. All these countries are creations of the lunatic Anglo-American establishment to begin with. What bonehead politician thinks that they will be immune to a trial at the Hague themselves? Bonehead Ambassador Rice obviously thinks she'll be safe from gunvernment for the rest of her life. What about their children? Are you world-government boneheads building a safe world for your children? The future is uncertain, no matter what power-hungry bonehead "planners" will tell you.

Oh, wait, no. This is all the fault of the evil, kid-touching Catholic Church which has no army. After all, the golden-rule is extremely terrible. So are the teachings to forgive and pray for your enemies. These surely must be the ideas that foment violence, not the human corruption of these principles.

I have a prediction which I hope does not come to pass: if the world state becomes as powerful as it wishes to be, human sacrifice, for various demented reasons, will have its revival. After all, in the new environmental religion, the earth is more important than humanoids with no souls. Except for those who are more equal than others.

Dear Ms. Kaplan:

The "international community" is a fictitious idea. What individuals are apart of this community? You mean the government-supported global corporations which decide all the important policies, while creating the illusion of representative government? You mean that international community? You mean the international community that goes to war needlessly, rather than acting as a positive example to inspire positive change? The west is bankrupt and this is obvious. War is good for GlobalSolutions.org, perhaps. I don't know. After all, I don't sense any remorse on this site for the horrors of war. But the "international community" of little people are no better off. There are plenty of dictatorships that the west supports. Libya is being attacked for political and economic reasons. Not humanitarian reasons.

Gee. Imagine that. Obama wants to go the Bush route, where US-subsidized mercenaries inevitably will execute the deposed leader so that certain truths can not be outed during a more open trial. Who'da thunk it! Oh well. "The more that things change ..." Now, when will Obama & Co. be tried for THEIR mass-murder of not only Libyans but also Iraqis, Afghans, Pakistanis, et al., et al.? Or, is it too much to expect a journalist to see the double standard in the omission of US-govt criminality? Take your time answering that while I get back to my more promising endeavor of trying to squeeze water out of a flint stone.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this blog post do not necessarily reflect the official policy of Citizens for Global Solutions.

Related Campaign

Women and children are often the earliest victims of mass atrocities. Support a code of conduct limiting use of the veto against early intervention in these situations.

Support Our Work

We have a proven track record in making a difference. But we can't build the peaceful future we envision without your support. Become a donor now!