Ad hoc international criminal tribunals
Hartford Web Publishing is not
the author of the documents in World
History Archives and does not presume to validate their
accuracy or authenticity nor to release their copyright.
- The real war criminals
- Editorial, The Workers World, 23 April
1998. When are war criminals not criminals? The top
officers of the Pentagon know the answer. It's when
they are cop, judge and jury and only they can bring
charges. That's why there is suddenly an upsurge of
resistance to the U.S. government's proposal to
establish a permanent war-crimes tribunal.
- Long-Range Justice Raises Fears for
Sovereignty
- By Barbara Crossette, The New York Times, 1
July 2001. the law is growing longer and the world smaller
for national leaders and others accused of
atrocities. What is dawning, human rights lawyers say, is
an age of justice without borders and not everyone is
happy about it, seeing it as an alarming challenge to
national sovereignty and a potentially unpredictable
political tool.
- International Law Should Not Be
Victors' Justice. Indicted or convicted war criminals are
all citizens of small, poor countries
- By Richard Gwyn, The Toronto Star, 4 July
2001. Arguments that among indictable war criminals are
Robert McNamara, the U.S. defense secretary, Israeli Prime
Minister Ariel Sharon, and U.S. secretary of state Henry
Kissinger, but those actually charged and convicted always
turn out to be from small poor countries like Slobodan
Milsosevic.
- Critics' Attack on Tribunals Turns to
Law Among Nation
- By William Glaberson, The New York Times,
26 December 2001. Going beyond claims that the military
tribunals authorized by President Bush would violate civil
liberties guaranteed by American law, some experts are
beginning to argue that they would breach international
law guaranteeing fair treatment of prisoners of war.