Posted on 04/11/2002 6:20:23 PM PDT by Pokey78
ADMIRAL Sir Michael Boyce, Chief of Defence Staff, has warned that the International Criminal Court could put servicemen's lives at risk.
Ministers were told that commanders would face a choice between being accused of war crimes or changing rules of engagement to the point where the enemy could be certain of striking first.
Senior officers said that, to avoid the risk of being called before the court, rules of engagement would have to be changed in a way that ensured that an enemy with fewer scruples could fire first.
If a ship's commander, an aircraft pilot or an artillery officer were to attack an apparently military target but end up accidentally killing civilians, they could be hauled before the court and accused of war crimes.
An enemy could even lay charges in the court that his opponent was damaging the environment, something senior officers say is difficult to avoid when waging war.
Sir Michael told the Commons defence select committee last year that, by ratifying the Rome statute, Britain was putting its troops at severe risk no matter how strictly they adhered to British law.
"I think we need to be very careful indeed that we do not put ourselves in a situation where a junior person carrying out orders which he believes to be entirely proper can find himself in front of the International Criminal Court," he said.
"So far I have been told that this is unlikely to happen because the national court would have the opportunity to investigate the case if it were pointed in that direction by the international court.
"I cannot say that 'unlikely' fills me with huge confidence. I would be much happier with a completely unequivocal statement but that is probably the best I will get."
The risks were demonstrated when the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia investigated claims after the Kosovo conflict that allied bombing was a war crime because it was known civilian deaths could not be avoided.
But in the event the tribunal decided the bombing did not constitute a war crime and the MoD has been at pains to point out that domestic courts of any signatory to the agreement would have jurisdiction rather than the international court.
Their belief that the international court will have little if any influence on British defence policy appears to be mirrored by the views of at least one senior British officer.
In a paper written at the Royal College of Defence Studies, Cap T F W Martin, director of personnel at Portsmouth, argued that the various negotiations had practically neutered the Rome statute.
The original high motive of "a gift of hope to future generations" had been buried among the 128 articles; 392 sub-articles; 350 sub-sub articles and 105 sub-sub-sub articles," Capt Martin said.
"Such a maze allows plenty of opportunities for impunity to survive untroubled. There are several coats of whitewash here. For it is only in the case of a failed state that an international court prosecution is at all likely. In all other cases, it will be the states and national courts that remain pre-eminent."
This could get interesting.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.