Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Sudan Leader Charged With Genocide

  1. Jul 11, 2008 #1

    lisab

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Wow -

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25632013/

    Does anyone know how difficult it is to get a warrant in this court? How high is the legal bar that the prosecutor has to meet?

    I had heard that members of the World Food Program were recently attacked in Sudan. Is that what it finally took to get this issue front and center at the UN? Well, I'm so glad they are doing something - finally.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 11, 2008 #2
    I don't care how hard it is to get a warrant for the court. I want to know what having a warrant means. Will we actually be able to just storm in and arrest him? Or will it be "Hey, can you please give up? We'd like to arrest you please."
     
  4. Jul 11, 2008 #3

    Art

    User Avatar

    It doesn't mean a lot really. There are already 2 warrants outstanding against Sudanese citizens which have yet to be acted on.

    The US are vehemently opposed to this court to the extent they have banned military aid (Hague Invasion Act) to any country which ratified the treaty which set it up and so without their active support it is hard to see how this case will go anywhere or the court itself for that matter.
     
  5. Jul 11, 2008 #4
    If Bush wanted to go after this jerk, he would do so with or without the court. On the other hand, if the warrant is issued and US doesn't enforce it, then it should be interesting to see who does.
     
  6. Jul 11, 2008 #5
    It's funny that we went after the guys who *might* have had weapons of mass destruction, but aren't even touching the guys who already did create mass destruction.
     
  7. Jul 11, 2008 #6

    Astronuc

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    There's not much in the way of enforcement, and so there is not much that can be done, unless the UN sends forces to arrest the guy. In theory, he would be arrested if he left Sudan, but it is unlikely countries with sympathetic governments would do so.
     
  8. Jul 13, 2008 #7
    From what I understand of the ICC is they have no capacity to arrest anyone at all outside the Netherlands. Meaning they have no control over any armed forces what so ever, UN, NATO, AU or even the Netherlands military. I think the only people brought to trial so far have been delivered by the country of origin.

    So if there is a big coup in Sudan and the new government wants to make a mends, they might arrest these people and put them on a flight to the Hague. Until that happens, these guys don't have much to worry about. A warrant from the ICC is like something they Might have to worry about If things go bad for them.

    Until the USA ratifies, which might not happen for another 30, 50, 100 years if ever, I think these guys would be safe from being sent to trial in the ICC even if they were living in the USA. They wouldn't be able to get a visa of course and the USA might deport them to somewhere in the African Union, or maybe even run a trial themselves, but they wouldn't be sent directly from the USA to the ICC by the Americans.
     
  9. Jul 13, 2008 #8
    well this is silly. the only thing he is doing is giving al-bashir (someone who i think has done a lot of bad things...) the backing of the whole arab world, that up until that point actually opposed most of his policies. a bit like the iraq war really.
     
  10. Jul 13, 2008 #9

    LowlyPion

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    Maybe if Sudan had the kind of strategic energy reserves the US and other nations are thirsty for world outrage would favor them with solutions that would help the people there?

    Unfortunately though Sudan is population rich and resource poor - a difficult cocktail as the world grapples with overpopulation. (That's not to say that something shouldn't be done, just cynicism that sadly little will likely happen there but more misery.)
     
  11. Jul 13, 2008 #10

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Unfortunately, the one thing that an ICC warrant seems to do is convince the recipient that he needs to stay in power for as long as he's alive.
     
  12. Jul 13, 2008 #11

    LowlyPion

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    Maybe a better course is to get organized crime mad at him?
     
  13. Jul 14, 2008 #12
    Charges were filed.

    msnbc
     
  14. Jul 14, 2008 #13
    They do have exactly those resources. Sudan is estimated to have 5 Billion barrels of oil reserves, and is Africa's third-largest petroleum producer. In fact, this is one of the main reasons that world outrage never adds up to concrete action on Sudan: they sign sweetheart deals with China to exchange oil for political cover. Any UN resolution that gets tough with them will be vetoed in the name of "non-interference in internal affairs of states." If they *didn't* have oil, there might be a chance of intervention.
     
  15. Jul 14, 2008 #14
    I do not believe this characterization is accurate. The main intention of the court is to provide a measure of justice in non-democratic nations that do not follow the laws of war or uphold basic human rights for their citizens.

    The fear among US leaders (and those of many other Democratic nations that follow the laws of war) is that the court will be used for political persecution of their citizens, which I believe is justified to some degree.

    The issue is not so much with the court itself, but rather diminished sovereignty and political persecution in countries like the United States, France, the UK, et cetera; countries which have a history of protecting their citizens' human rights and following the Geneva and Hague Protocols.

    The US has been willing to support the court, so long as it does not have jurisdiction over US citizens.
     
  16. Jul 14, 2008 #15

    arildno

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    The genocide in Darfur is that of an unleashed Islamic jihad on Christian ans animist populations. Mr. Idries is to be a crown witness, according to Sydney Morning Herald:
    http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/07/13/1215887451622.html



    Note how the leading article misdirects attention by "ethnicizing" the conflict, rather than report the direct Islamic linkage Mr. Idries provides.
     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2008
  17. Jul 14, 2008 #16
    Where is the "direct Islamic linkage Mr. Idries provides"?
     
  18. Jul 14, 2008 #17
    it is ethnic, in my oppinion. i denounce such disgusting acts commited by the sudaneese government, although raising charges will probably only make things worse. i mean, to take a look at the tv now, about 10 headlines on the al-jazeera news ticker are about the current situation in sudan, such as how the gulf cooperation council supports al-bashir in the current crisis. i can already see thing escelating, for no reason at all.
     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2008
  19. Jul 15, 2008 #18

    arildno

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    You might have read the article before you posted.
     
    Last edited: Jul 15, 2008
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Sudan Leader Charged With Genocide
  1. Chad-sudan war (Replies: 1)

Loading...