The International Criminal Court (ICC) will be a permanent court for trying individuals accused of committing genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Following the Rome Statute of the ICC entry into force on 1 July 2002, the Court is expected to be fully functional by mid-2003. This court is a good idea don't you think?
Today, 77 countries have ratified the treaty (Colombia was the 77th!). But USA have not and Bush don't want to sign it in the future.
On 2 August 2002, President George W. Bush signed the supplemental appropriations bill, making the American Servicemembers' Protection Act binding US national law. This act includes a provision that authorizes the use of military force to free any citizen of the US or ally country being held by the Court in The Hague. In addition, the law provides for the withdrawal of U.S. military assistance from countries ratifying the ICC treaty, and restricts U.S. participation in United Nations peacekeeping unless the U.S. obtains immunity from prosecution. There is a clause, however, that allows the President to waive these provisions on basis of "national interest."
Now, the US government is actively seeking bilateral agreements with as many countries as possible, in order to exempt US officials from prosecution by the ICC. To date, two countries (Romania and Israel) have signed such agreements, but several governments, including Bosnia, Canada, Italy, Norway, Slovakia, Yugoslavia and the United Kingdom have reportedly been approached by the US government.
I can't understand why USA are opposed to such a court????
I don't start this topic to bash USA (I don't have all the points of view) but to UNDERSTAND. Could you help me?
All those informations can be found on http://www.iccnow.org/