by Kennedy Graham
Next week I shall be in Kathmandu for a meeting on the International Criminal Court. I am hoping that it will go some way to strengthening the rule of law over international crimes.
I have been active this year in the House in seeking to strengthen the ICC. My first member’s bill, introduced in August, sought to make aggression, in violation of the UN Charter, a crime in NZ domestic law, in anticipation of it becoming a crime in international law through the ICC. And I have asked several questions of ministers on this subject.
At Kathmandu, the ICC President, Judge, Sang-Hyun Song will give the keynote address along with the Speaker of the Nepalese Assembly.
I shall speak on the challenges and benefits of becoming a member state in the ICC which has jurisdiction over genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. It is possible that aggression will also be a justiciable crime next year.
Also speaking with me will be, among others, an EU representative and other parliamentarians as well.
The meeting is held during a recess week and all costs are covered by the organisers – no cost to the NZ taxpayer.
Published in Justice & Democracy by Kennedy Graham on Thu, November 26th, 2009
Tags: International Criminal Court, Kathmandu
More posts by Kennedy Graham | more about Kennedy Graham
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
Keep us updated. I’d be interested to know how it goes, and whether aggression can be included, as it is already illegal under international law.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0 (+2)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
0 
29 (-29)
Like or Dislike:
5 
1 (+4)
Murder , genocide, rape and violence are the most covert of war crimes that will no doubt be discussed at the above mentioned meeting.
But what about economic crimes? The crime of slashing tarrifs to chase the cheap dollar that ultimately collapses local manufacturing industries and put people out of work.
I am in full support of what Kennedy is doing but I think that it is very important to discuss economic crime and corruption as that seems to be the initial incubator of all instability.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1 (0)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
2 
12 (-10)
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Like or Dislike:
1 
13 (-12)
Wat –
would those thugs you’re referring to include China, Russia, the USA, the UK … the members of the UN Security Council who have used their veto to block resolutions to stop the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine?
‘Cos the states you named have hardly any influence over the ‘big ticket’ votes in the UN over disarmament, disengagement in war zones, or lifting the medical supply embargoes against citizens of targeted war-zone states (Iraq, Cuba, Afghanistan, Palestine) which cause more deaths than outright bombing campaigns, mostly women & children.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Does that mean you aren’t a fan of the UN either katie? You didn’t counter wat’s point, and added something of your own to reinforce it.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Forgive me if i seem framed that a little abrasively, but my general question/point stands.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
If we’re simply to hand our consciences over to the thugs at the UN like this, it surely follows that we will have to adopt a UN International Blasphemy Law if and when it gets passed.
“If ratified in countries that enshrine freedom of expression as a fundamental right, such a treaty would require them to limit free speech if it risks seriously offending religious believers…Experts say the bid stands some chance of eventual success if Muslim countries persist…The proposal may have some support in the General Assembly. For several years the Islamic Conference has successfully passed a nonbinding resolution at the General Assembly condemning “defamation of religions.”…The Islamic Conference “believes that the attack on sacredly held beliefs and the defamation of religions, religious symbols, personalities and dogmas impinge on the enjoyment of human rights of followers of those religions,” the letter said. It was sent last month to members of the Ad Hoc Committee on Complementary Standards, a temporary committee created to consider a previous anti-racism treaty.
In a separate submission to the committee, Pakistan proposed extending the treaty against racism to require signatories to “prohibit by law the uttering of matters that are grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion.” ”
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iX2fakx508zGm4ff4XnC XYK260SwD9C2SQ401
Yeah, that’s the same UN that you’d have making NZ’s decisions about when to resort to violence, Ken. Quite why you would want the likes of the Saudis and Pakistanis to have any say whatsoever in Kiwi decision making is completely beyond me.
“A Saudi Arabian court has sentenced a 75-year-old Syrian woman to 40 lashes, four months imprisonment and deportation from the kingdom for having two unrelated men in her house, according to local media reports.”
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/03/09/saudi.arabia.lashes/inde x.html?eref=edition
Like or Dislike:
0 
2 (-2)
“impinge on the enjoyment of human rights of followers of those religions,”
I really do hate it when people just create human rights ‘just like that’.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)