"...nationhood as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority." - Strobe Talbott Deputy Secretary of State, 1994-2001
Posted on 08/02/2003 4:40:52 PM PDT by bets
International Commission of Jurists (excerpt) (excerpt)
The most pressing concern in the legal fight for the promotion and protection of human rights is the inadequate incorporation of international human rights standards into national legislation and case-law. In response, the ICJ's National Implementation Programme aims to assist in the national implementation of international human rights standards both through direct monitoring and the provision of expert technical assistance. In addition, the ICJ's National Implementation Programme also encompasses the activities of the ICJ's Center for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers (CIJL). The CIJL was established in 1978 to safeguard the independence of judges and lawyers and protect them from attacks and harrassment. The core work of the CIJL is to promote international standards relating to the need for an independent and impartial tribunal and to ensure that Governments implement these standards in their legislation and practice. Evolving Law However, national implementation is inevitably subject to social, political and technological realities and the interdisciplinary challenges presented by other branches of international law. In response, the ICJ's Evolving Law Programme aims to add precision to exisiting human rights standards, to clarify the interaction between human rights standards and other branches of international law, and to propose new international standards where required. ------------------ Recent news by topic (10)
Administration of Justice -------------------- United Nations Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary (excerpt) Principle 4. There shall not be any inappropriate or unwarranted interference with the judicial process, nor shall judicial decisions by the courts be subject to revision.
The International Commission of Jurists is dedicated to the primacy, coherence and implementation of international law and principles that advance human rights.
National Implementation
Independence of Judges & Lawyers
Economic, Social & Cultural Rights
Disappearances
Gender Issues
Impunity & Reparations
Military Tribunals
Terrorism and Human Rights
Torture
(endorsed by the UN General Assembly in 1985)
According to the Principles, a State must ensure the independence of the judiciary and refrain from interfering, in any way, with the judicial process. The said Principles state:
Principle 1. The independence of the judiciary shall be guaranteed by the State and enshrined in the Constitution or the law of the country. It is the duty of all governmental and other institutions to respect and observe the independence of the judiciary.
BTW out of their 60 Commissioners from all over the world, 2 are from the US.
Also, even though the US has been vocal and proud about not participating in the ICC, they've been in the ICJ, the International Court of Justice, for decades!
The International Commission of Jurists specializes in human rights laws, such as ethnic intimidation type cases. This relates to post Ethnic Intimidation - PA Bill 1493 Passed 12/02.
**** NOTE their own words:****
"...to ensure that Governments implement these standards in their legislation and practice."
"...and enshrined in the Constitution or the law of the country."
And as for their "Principles" - paraphrased they sound like "All members MUST comply." ...and the US is a member.
You bet it does. Unfortunately it isn't the only alarming thing that is happening to people and countries. Somehow or another evil such as the U.N. and its avatars must be overcome. If we don't, and soon, then I can only say: "God, help us all."
I am thinking more and more that the federal government is the enemy of the people as it aims to destroy our economy, constitutional rights and liberties and throw us into a New World Order where we'll all be serfs.
I know that God is in control and I also know that tough times are ahead. Still I think it is the responsiblity of Christians to resist the evil of totalitarianism in every way possible.
Interesting comments. How much power/influence do these jackals have in the US? Does our gov't kowtow to them? (I have a hard time reading or comprehending legalese...) Since Marxism and other Utopian philosophies are all based on secular humanism, there is nothing absolute except themselves. The new high priests.
A friend of mine told me the same story about a neighborhood in S. California where her brother lives - a very nice area until recently, due to a subdivision of very nice houses built by the gov't and peopled wholesale with welfare recipients. Now it has become the scene of rape, theft, murder, and arson.
I am far from a conspiracy theorist but what the h**l is going on? They can't be THAT stupid. Is it that they are really trying to disrupt society to implement more control as people say?
Beyond Treason (A ToThePoint™ Report) What Ann Coulter Doesn’t Understand About Liberals ^
Does this remind you of the term "living Constitution?" It should. The Constitution is made to mean whatever is wanted, and recently the Supreme Court has come right out and explained their use of the term "living Constitution."
There is a widespread misperception that current U.S. halfway measures, such as "unsigning" the treaty and exempting peacekeepers from prosecution for one year, afford genuine safety to our country's sovereignty and people. In reality, these measures actually compound our danger by lulling the American people and Congress into a false sense of security and providing a disincentive to take timely and effective action now, when it is most needed."
-------------
Talking about juries, this reminds me of the International Commission of Jurists, where 60 jurists from all over the world decide your fate. And guess what - the US is already part of it!! We have 2 out of the 60 jurists.
(debunk that Mr. StopGlobalWhining)
Thank you for saying that - resist until you can't resist any more.
I just recently heard a pastor on the radio say that he admits he's an "escapist," a believer in the pre-trib rapture. And he believes there's a connection w/the UN, creeping globalism, and how they relate to end times. Neither of those upset me, but what he proceeded to say DID upset me:
He said that he didn't care what the UN did, because he didn't plan to be around.
I'm also a minister, and to hear someone who's supposed to be protective say that he didn't care - it really got me upset. I Corin 13 describes love in great detail, and "love protects."
God says LOVE PROTECTS - so until you're raptured (and I don't really care if you're pre-trib, mid-trib, post-trib....), until you're gone you're to protect others. Protect children. Protect people from being oppressed. God says we're to help widows, orphans, and the oppressed. So, all you folks who say "I've got mine, so what," God will judge you for not caring and not protecting others. (sorry, I'm mad - can you understand why?)
Could it be righteous indignation? So many pastors today are wimps and dupes. Obviously you're neither.
Thanks for the informative post
The crux is in the concept of HUMAN RIGHTS.
This is a purposely ambiguous expression.
It was first coined in the French Revolution as "the rights of Man" (droit de l'homme), meaning of the rights of the 'common man', as opposed to the rights of the Church (canon law), and the rights of the Nobility (which are both genetic - they are transmitted by bloodline, and arbitrary - they are subject to the will of the King). What it meant was the rights of the citizens; i.e. civil rights.
The usage of 'rights of man', as opposed to 'civil rights' (a concept used in the American Revolution), was the means by which the French advertized their revolution as being universal and as applying to all men. So much so, that they immediately transformed their republic into empire, and Napoleon attempted the conquest of Europe.
The concept was then picked up again by the trans-national, progressive, socialist, 'united nationist', movement in the 1970's, after all the post-WWII battles for the real civil rights had already been waged and won (I refer here to the battle for equal rights in the USA, to the battle to abolish apartheid in South Africa, etc.), and transformed into 'human rights' (the rights of all men): human rights are the supposed generalization of civil rights.
Civil rights are the rights of citizens as guaranteed by a (specific) state (constitutional rights). They are not universal and certainly not 'natural' (as the word 'human' likes to imply), but local and cultural. They vary even within the Western World (Free Speech is not a right in Italy!, the inviolability of the person is not a right in the USA - death penalty, etc.), forget about third world countries which do not have the romano-christian background, and hence have a very foggy idea of what we are talking about. By suppressing the civil nature of these rights the UN&Co. attempts to foist on all and sundry a specific distillation of these rights as envisaged by their clique - with severe consequences for the right to independent sovreignty of nations. While it is a laudable effort to attempt to civilize (meaning here: to render civil in the legal sense of the term) the Non-western World, this contrasts with the right to cultural determination:i.e. cultural relativism. Hence, the idea that while pushing for civil rights in non-western countries would be "warping the nature of those cultures", pushing for human (= natural) rights is ok. None of the big Eastern cultures (China, India, Islaam, etc.) fell for for this ploy. If not as a means to turn it against us: note the idiotic rant of Al Quaeda's no 2 man who expects that we extend our (US) civil rights to those terrorists held at GITMO who in their own countries would already have been stone-cold dead.
The idea to propose new international standards where required. actually means they are getting ready to tamper with OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.
Without the money and power of the U.S. they are empty vessels.
Our enemy is not these international bodies - directly; our enemy is the American 'Left' who forces us to prop up these court jesters with money and military might. While it is true that there is obviously an emerging world socialist oligarchy [and that it is aligning with the 'world Islamic movement'], in the end they all think the wealth of hard-working Americans is their honey pot.
As I said in my post on the other [similar] thread, no court or law is worth the paper its charter is written on without enforcement.
And just who do these elitists think should pay and equip the enforcement organs? ... yeah....!
The traitors of America are not in Brussels; they are in America. They are the ones who will 'allow' international enforcement upon American citizens without 'Constitutional recourse'.
FReegards...
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.