Tag: Genocide Convention

[2002] U.S. Announces Intent Not to Ratify International Criminal Court Treaty

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)1 Comment

U.S. Announces Intent Not to Ratify International Criminal Court Treaty

On May 6, 2002, the Bush Administration announced that the United States does not intend to become a party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. John Bolton, the Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, sent a letter to Kofi Annan, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, stating that “the United States does not intend to become a party to the treaty,” and that, “[a]ccordingly, the United States has no legal obligations arising from its signature on December 31, 2000.” [1]

…

While the policy merits of the Bush Administration’s announcement are of course open to debate, the announcement appears to be consistent with international law. There is nothing in international law that obligates a signatory to a treaty to become a party to the treaty, [6] and the Rome Statute itself (in Article 125) states that it is “subject to ratification, acceptance or approval by signatory States.” In addition, Article 18 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties provides that, upon signing a treaty, a nation is “obliged to refrain from acts which would defeat the object and purpose” of the treaty “until it shall have made its intention clear not to become a party to the treaty.” The Vienna Convention thus contemplates that nations may announce an intent not to ratify a treaty after signing it.

Related:

International Criminal Court: Letter to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan

Secretary Rumsfeld Statement On The ICC Treaty

American Foreign Policy and the International Criminal Court

President Clinton Statement on Signature of the International Criminal Court Treaty

Modern Treaty Law and Practice: Third Edition (PDF)

International law : cases and materials

Two Barrels Aimed at African People’s Socialist Party

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

With new FBI and Department of “Justice” (DOJ) attacks expected in early January, a defense, mobilization and information session attracted hundreds of allies of the African People’s Socialist Party (APSP). On Friday, December 23 they zoomed into the “Emergency Mass Meeting: Hands Off Uhuru! Hands Off Africa!” The APSP told its supporters that it expects indictments in early January 2023 and possibly sooner.

Two Barrels Aimed at African People’s Socialist Party

Related:

The FBI wants to put me on trial for fighting for black freedom. Put the colonial state on trial! We will win!

How Canada Created the R2P Doctrine, with Myanmar as its Next Potential Victim

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

By Daniel Xie – September 2, 2022

On September 21, 2021, Myanmar’s National Unity Government (NUG), a government-in-exile formed by supporters of former state counselor Aung San Suu Kyi declared a “people’s defensive war” against the Tatmadaw (another name for the armed forces of Myanmar). Suu Kyi’s party, the National League for Democracy (NLD), was overthrown by the Tatmadaw in February 2021. On a video broadcast on Facebook, NUG acting president Duwa Lashi La declared a “public revolution” against military “terrorists”. This declaration of open war comes after months of sporadic armed resistance by various anti-government civilian militias and ethnic militias.

How Canada Created the R2P Doctrine, with Myanmar as its Next Potential Victim

The Unjustified Criticism of High Commissioner Michelle Bachetlet’s Visit to China

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

As former UN rapporteurs we are committed to the promotion and protection of human rights in all corners of the world, including China. Progress can only be achieved on the basis on good faith implementation of the UN Charter and UN human rights treaties, and requires patience, perseverance, and international solidarity.

The Unjustified Criticism of High Commissioner Michelle Bachetlet’s Visit to China

Reflections on Genocide as the Ultimate Crime

Tina Marie (Ms. Cat)

Reflections on Genocide as the Ultimate Crime

Genocide is a well-defined term in international law – in the 1948 Genocide Convention and Article 6 of the Rome Statute.The most respected international tribunals have separately agreed that proof of the crime of genocide depends on an extremely convincing presentation of factual evidence, including documentation of an intent to destroy in whole or in part national, ethnic, racial or religious group. The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, the International Court of Justice – all have endeavoured to provide authoritative tests of “intent,” treating intent as the essential element in the crime of genocide. This jurisprudence is what should be guiding our politicians in reaching prudent conclusions as to whether there exist credible grounds to put forward accusations of genocide, given its inflammatory effects. We should be asking whether the factual situation is clouded, calling for an independent international investigation followed by further action if deemed appropriate, and in nuclear-armed world, we should be extremely careful before making such an accusation.

Related:

*Xinjiang*