Disclaimer: Content on the YP4 blog does not necessarily reflect the views of Young People For or People For the American Way Foundation. The views, ideas, statements or claims posted on this site by members of the public cannot in any way be attributed to either Young People For or People For the American Way Foundation.
The Necessary Prosecution of War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity in the Congo
Last Friday, September 26, 2008, the International Criminal Court in the Hague announced that there was sufficient evidence to go forward with prosecutions for war crimes and crimes against humanity against two Congolese warlords, Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui. http://www.icc-cpi.int/press/pressreleases/425.html The two warlords, who are already in custody, have been ordered to stand trial on such criminal charges as murder, the use of child soldiers under the age of 15, rape and sexual slavery. The charges stem from a 2003 attack on the village of Bogoro in eastern Congo in which more than 200 people from the village were killed including women, children and the elderly, many of whom were civilians who were attacked and hacked to death by soldiers using machetes. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/27/world/africa/27briefs-2WARLORDSTOB_BRF.html?ref=world Women who survived the original attack were forcibly held in camps where they were forced to be sexual slaves and were raped repeatedly. http://www.newsdaily.com/stories/tre48p7ou-us-warcrimes-congo/
The International Criminal Court is an independent permanent court which has authority to try persons who are accused of serious crimes which are of international concern, including genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. http://www.icc-cpi.int/about.html The International Criminal Court was set up as the world's first permanent criminal tribunal in 2002 and to date 108 countries have signed a treaty recognizing its authority. Regretfully despite the United States' historic role in helping to initiate the proceedings following World War II to try defendants at Nuremburg for war crimes and other crimes against humanity, the United States has not yet signed the treaty recognizing the International Criminal Court. http://www.benferencz.org/arts/71.html
It is important that the international criminal prosecutions of Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui go forward, both to punish them individually for the crimes they have been charged with if they are convicted, and to send a message to others that crimes against humanity and war crimes will not go unpunished by the world, no matter how long it takes to bring the perpetrators to justice or whether their crimes are committed in a large European capital city or in a remote village in an out of the way corner of Africa.
Last year I read the autobiography "A Long Way Gone: Memoirs of a Boy Soldier" by former child soldier Ishmael Beah, which described in vivid and shocking detail the cruelty and dehumanizing effects of war on the child soldiers who are forced to participate in it. If the trial of these two individuals, Germain Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui, helps to shine a spotlight on this horrible practice of forcing children to participate in armed conflict, so much the better. Finally, prosecuting these two individuals will also reaffirm the principle that the systematic use of rape and sexual slavery against women as a conscious military tactic are war crimes and crimes against humanity and they will be punished as such by the world community.
- Gabriela McCall-Delgado's blog
- Login or register to post comments
A slight tangent: You might
A slight tangent:
You might get a kick out of this: If an American is ever put on trial at The Hague, America reserves the right to invade.
On one hand, as a military brat, I understand why there is a need for the US to protect its troops from persecution. As a Japanese PM once said, for better or worse, the US is the world's cop, and enough countries have incentive to put those cops on trial, with or without moral justification.
On the other, the UN would very quickly become a paper tiger without the US as a member. When the US joined the UN, it agreed to be recognized as one of now 192 countries, on completely equal footing with the exception of a permanent seat on the Security Council, where it stands on equal footing with four other world powers. If Security Council reform has its way, it will be several more countries in the coming years.
I think that until the Security Council and the UN as a whole empowers the DPKO with both enough funding and powerful mandates to protect both civilians and themselves (there are over 15 active missions at the moment), the UN has little business dictating to the US as to how it should use its troops to enforce peace.
Obviously, the rationale and method used by the current administration to wage that peace is morally debatable; once upon a time, the US had a very good reputation abroad for ending conflict. Just take a look at the Balkan Crisis. I was was in The Hague when Milosevic was on trial, for over four years, for the war crimes he had perpetrated.
But, the ICC is a pretty effective tool for bringing war criminals to justice. However, most war criminals brought to justice there have curiously come from formerly powerful and now deposed governments--no one has seriously suggested that the heads of the Sudanese government be put on trial because no one dare roll in with their tanks and guns into Khartoum because China has a vested interest in the region.
The ICC is toothless, and sadly, the US prefers it stays that way.
Nice analysis!
---------
If of thy mortal goods thou art bereft,
And from thy slender store two loaves along to thee are left,
Sell one, and with the dole
Buy hyacinths to feed thy soul.
- Moslih Eddin