The current charges against the Kenyan President and his deputy tend to blackmail the Kenyan officials and undermine the democratic process and governance.
The charges will encourage Kenya to withdraw from Rome statute establishing ICC along with other countries.
LoL. The continent with the highest murder rates want to withdraw from the ICC. I wonder why...
If the ICC loses 40 african countries it loses 3/4th of it's workload. I think it's a blessing really for the ICC.
And take away the only real hope of bringing mass murderers to justice? However long it takes?
How does that help ordinary Africans?
And take away the only real hope of bringing mass murderers to justice? However long it takes?
How does that help ordinary Africans?
It's not like other countries are kicking out the African countries from the ICC. They themselves want to do it.
Yes but that's the leaders, not the people. Very few are democratically elected leaders - many like Charles Taylor were bullyboys who rose to power at the point of a gun. He would never have been tried in Sierra Leone but the ICC has sentenced him to 50 years in prison.
That alone is worth it.
If that is how you feel then you should be logical with yourself and advocate turning Liberia and Sierra Leone into colonies.
Yes but that's the leaders, not the people. Very few are democratically elected leaders - many like Charles Taylor were bullyboys who rose to power at the point of a gun. He would never have been tried in Sierra Leone but the ICC has sentenced him to 50 years in prison.
That alone is worth it.
That doesn't follow - pleas expand.
Since you feel these countries are not capable of exercising sovereignty obviously they should cease existing as sovereign and independent countries. I'm not advocating this, you are.
That is true, and indeed, those are grounds for not permitting them to remove themselves from the ICC. But in countries where they have at least some functioning democracy, if those countries want to remove themselves, that's fine.
They are practicing sovereignty - even done badly it is sovereignty. A dictatorship - however ruthless is sovereignty. Your argument is still weak. My concern is a lack of accountability to wider humanity as well as those within a society. Sometimes a people are subjugate - such as the situation in Darfur and the only protection (however weak) is the international community.
Your alternative is to just ignore genocide or ethnic cleansing I suppose?
No, I feel countries should be responsible for what happens on their territory.
The ICC is a perversion of international law.
So you feel international law would only cover boundary disputes, rules on international waters, rules on trans-national conduct of war and the like?
A despot murdering millions in his own country should just be ignored by everyone else because it's not their business?
I believe that international law should stick to what traditionally falls under international law. I feel no need for an instance to play policeman for the whole world. If we followed your ideas pretty much the whole of Africa would have to be military occupied and subjected to outside rule. And most of Asia too.
How would your preferred version of a world dealt with someone like Hitler?
I think the world dealt appropriately with Hitler. When he started attacking other countries his country was attacked and he was driven from power.
How do you feel the world should have dealt with the despotism of Mao. Should the US have invaded China and conducted nuclear war to end his despotic reign?
In the meantime, he was free to kill Jews, homosexuals, Roma and political adversaries. The fact we looked the other way so long gave him the courage to attack other nations.
In Mao's case, there weren't any powerful neighbours who wanted to see an end - Russia (most powerful neighbour of China) wasn't interested and was dealing ruthlessly with internal opposition anyway. The international community should have done more - and that means more than just America.
You should try to learn some historical facts first. The Holocaust occured during WWII, not before.
Hitler and Stalin were both bad. How did the world deal with them?How would your preferred version of a world dealt with someone like Hitler?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?