In Victory for the Rule of Law, U.S. Withdraws Immunity Request

NEW YORK – On Wednesday, June 23, 2004, the United States wisely heeded a call by other member states of the United Nations Security Council, including several close allies, and withdrew its request for a renewal of resolution 1487. The resolution would have exempted from the International Criminal Court's jurisdiction over genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes all U.S. forces taking part in U.N. missions or missions authorized by the U.N., such as the multinational force in Iraq after June 30. Human Rights First opposed the draft U.S. resolution, which would have undermined the rule of law, violated the U.N. Charter, and damaged the authority of the ICC as well as the Security Council itself.

"We hope Wednesday’s decision by the U.S. signals a renewed commitment to the universal enforcement of basic legal standards for the conduct of armed forces," said Fiona McKay, director of Human Rights First's International Justice Program.

Consideration of the request for immunity for U.S. forces was overwhelmed in recent weeks by mounting allegations of torture of detainees by U.S. forces in Iraq and the release of U.S. Administration memos approving of interrogation techniques prohibited under international law. At the U.N., these disclosures led Secretary-General Kofi Annan to speak out against the U.S.-sponsored resolution, which had passed the Security Council each of the last two years. Opposition to the resolution should thus be seen as an affirmation of the principle that no country’s forces are above the law.

Human Rights First is concerned at reports that the U.S. may plan to draw back from peacekeeping missions around the world due to the non-renewal of the resolution. "U.S. forces have a vital role to play in U.N. peacekeeping, which also happens to be very much in the U.S.’s interest. We urge the U.S. not to step back from its responsibilities in helping to maintain international peace and security," said McKay.

Human Rights First also sees this moment as an opportunity for the U.S. to reassess its position with respect to the ICC, particularly given the ICC Prosecutor's announcement on Wednesday of an investigation into gross violations committed in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. "We hope the U.S. can take a closer look at the crucial role the ICC can play in advancing the common interest of bringing to justice perpetrators of serious crimes in countries that are unable to do the job themselves," said McKay.

The U.S. asserts that its opposition to the ICC is based on fears that the Court will bring politically motivated prosecutions against U.S. nationals. These fears ignore the more than adequate legal safeguards against politically motivated prosecutions contained in the ICC Statute. Such fears also ignore the careful and professional practices of the ICC with respect to countries such as the DRC, where the ICC commenced its investigation into serious crimes following an invitation by the DRC government.

-30-