If we needed a reminder why the International Criminal Court is a
bad idea, we have one. The ICC plans on investigating U.S.
actions in Afghanistan.
Brett D. Schaefer and Steven Groves of the Heritage Foundation
report:
the prosecutor for the International Criminal Court (ICC)
stated that investigations into alleged war crimes and crimes
against humanity in Afghanistan may result in the prosecution
of U.S. policymakers or servicemen. The potential prosecution
of U.S. persons by the court over incidents that the U.S. deems
lawful is one of the prime reasons why the Bush Administration
did not seek U.S. ratification of the treaty creating the
court, rejected ICC claims of authority over U.S. persons, and
sought to negotiate agreements with countries to protect U.S.
persons from being arrested and turned over to the ICC.
The investigation is not complete, the prosecutor has not
determined if he will seek warrants against U.S. officials or
servicemen, and Afghanistan is constrained from turning over
U.S. persons to the ICC under existing agreements. However, the
potential legal confrontation justifies past U.S. policy,
emphasizes the need to maintain and expand legal protections
for U.S. persons against ICC claims of jurisdiction, and should
lead the Obama Administration to endorse the Bush
Administration's policies toward the ICC.
The Obama administration reportedly is prepared to increase
cooperation with the ICC. Instead, President Barack
Obama should reaffirm present U.S. policy, refusing
both to be bound by the so-called Rome Statute and to
acknowledge UN jurisdiction over American personnel.
About the Author
Doug Bandow is a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute and the Senior Fellow in International Religious Persecution at the Institute on Religion and Public Policy. A former Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan, he is author of Beyond Good Intentions: A Biblical View of Politics (Crossway).
