Personal tools

Argument: US opposition to ICC impairs action and justice in Sudan

From Debatepedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Parent debate

Supporting quotations

David Scheffer. former US Ambassador at Large for War Crimes Issues (1997-2001). "The US and the International Criminal Court Then and Now". Jurist. 16 July 2008 - In Washington many lost sight of the court’s aim to bring to justice political and military leaders who orchestrate massive atrocity crimes against thousands in lawless regions where national justice fails. The court, entering its seventh year of work, struggles to meet that challenge in Darfur (with Sudan’s President Bashir now facing a possible arrest warrant for genocide), Uganda, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and the Central African Republic.

Eric Reeves. "Obama, Darfur, and ICC justice". Christian Science Monitor. 24 Nov. 2008 - The Obama administration can take a key leadership role right now, beginning with unambiguous support for the international legitimacy of the ICC. The administration in waiting should also commit to the provision of critical helicopter and ground transport, the lack of which has so far crippled UNAMID.

And the US must be sharply mindful of Khartoum's evasive penchant for engaging multiple diplomatic interlocutors: With its regional and global allies, the US must work to compel the regime to engage with a single, credible peace forum that recognizes not only Darfuri combatants and civil society leadership, but the obligations of international law.

To do less is to acquiesce to the threats of a brutal regime whose responsibility for atrocity crimes throughout Darfur is beyond dispute.

Charles J. Brown, Citizens for Global Solutions’ President & CEO - "As the crisis in Darfur, Sudan demonstrates, the world no longer can afford the luxury of creating ad hoc specialized tribunals. The ICC is the only option available to help bring a quick end to the genocide in Darfur."[1]

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits