Follow Us: 
|
Follow Us:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Browse by Region
|
Interview with Ahmad Harun, More reactions to US announcement
01 June 2007
Please find below information related to the International Criminal Court's
(ICC) investigation in Darfur and more reactions to the recent announcement by the US government on sanctions against Sudan, among other updates: A. INTERVIEW WITH AHMAD MUHAMMAD HARUN: On May 29, US President George W. Bush announced economic sanctions against Sudan for its role in Darfur. The sanctions target government-run companies and three individuals. One of them is Ahmad Muhammad Harun, Sudan's state Minister for Humanitarian Affairs, accused by the ICC for the perpetration of graves crimes in Darfur. Khartoum bitterly reacted and described the measures as "unfair and untimely" and urged "the rest of the world to ignore them." Harun, in an interview by Kamal Hasan Bakhit, published by London-based newspaper Al-Quds al-Arabi's website and distributed by BBC Monitoring, denied that genocide was being committed in Darfur and blamed the West and China for the war in the region of his country, claiming that those countries wanted to control Sudan due to its resources and geopolitical location. When asked about the arrest warrants issued by the ICC, he responded "I am not very much concerned with the warrant issued by the [International Criminal] court. It does not add anything new." B. MORE REACTIONS TO US ANNOUNCEMENT: (1) Al- Ahram Weekly (Egypt) quotes Ali Sadiq, Spokesman to the Sudanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs "These American measures come at a time when Sudan is actively discussing peace in Darfur and working on the hybrid force". And highlights that "the US has also imposed a travel ban and frozen the assets of three leading Sudanese politicians: Awad Ibn Ouf, Sudan's head of military intelligence and security chief, Minister of Humanitarian affairs Ahmed Haroun, who was in charge of Darfur between 2002 and 2004 and is accused by the International Criminal Court (ICC) and humanitarian relief agencies of arming, aiding and abetting nomadic Arab tribes in their attacks against Darfur's indigenous, non- Arab population, and Khalil Ibrahim, the head of the Darfur armed opposition group the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM). (2) Human Rights Watch sent a letter to the UN Security Council on Darfur strongly urging "the United Nations Security Council to take multilateral and decisive action to prevent the unacceptable human rights situation in Darfur from becoming worse and threatening the lives, homes, and security of tens of thousands of more people in Darfur and surrounding areas." Also, HRW calls the Council to establish a Darfur Recovery Fund with Sudanese oil revenues and to specify the actions required by the government of Sudan to rescind the mandatory fund procedure. The conditions should include cooperation with the International Criminal Court in its investigations of crimes in Darfur and the execution of arrest warrants and transfer of suspects to The Hague. (3) The Boston Globe, in the article "Seeking Sudan's pressure point" states that the latest sanctions are limited in scope, "adding 30 Sudanese government-controll outfits that are already prohibited from trading with American companies or individuals or from using the US financial system." It adds that Khartoum "has long disdained such limited economic penalties -- as well as diplomatic pressure at the United Nations and an International Criminal Court indictment of two officials accused of furthering the ethnic cleansing, raping, and murdering in Darfur." (4) Citizens for Global Solutions states that President Bush's statement on May 29, on sanctions against key Sudanese companies and individuals "marks the second time in a month that he has announced stronger measures in response to Sudan's lack of action in ending the on-going atrocities in the Darfur region of the country." It adds that the current American administration should also "offer to support the efforts of the ongoing International Criminal Court investigation in Darfur, especially in light of recently released arrest warrants." (5) Sudanese President Bashir stressed that "the U.S. sanctions on Sudan were aimed at striking the economy in this African country," Sudan's Alwan daily reported on Thursday. On the same day, the Sudanese Vice President Salva Kiir stated that "U.S. sanctions imposed on Sudan will do nothing to help bring peace to the Darfur region." C. OPINION ARTICLE: Published by the Sudan Tribune, "US Sanctions: The South Sudan Prospective" by Steve Paterno. Please take note of the Coalition's policy on situations before the ICC (below), which explicitly states that the CICC will not take a position on potential or pending situations before the court. The Coalition, however, will continue to provide the most up-to-date information about the ICC. Regards, Mariana Rodriguez Pareja Spanish Information Coordinator/ Latin America Analyst CICC ************ A. INTERVIEW WITH HARUN 1. BBC Monitoring Middle East "Political Sudanese minister downplays Darfur arrest warrant, blames west for war" -May 31, 2007 (no link available) Some excerpts "The Sudanese humanitarian affairs minister, Ahmad Harun, has downplayed the arrest warrant issued against him by the International Criminal Court over the Darfur war. He also denied that genocide was being committed in Darfur. Harun blamed the West and China for the war in Darfur claiming these countries wanted to control Sudan due to its resources and geopolitical location. The following is the text of Harun's interview by Kamal Hasan Bakhit published by London-based newspaper Al-Quds al-Arabi website on 28 May. [Bakhit] After the arrest warrant, what does Minister Ahmad Harun think now? [Harun] I am now thinking of assuming my responsibilities at the Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs. I am not very much concerned with the warrant issued by the court. It does not add anything new. [Bakhit] What is the serious thing about this warrant, and is it possible that you might be arrested abroad by the Interpol or others? [Harun] I do not expect this in any event. It is a political step, and not a legal step. [Bakhit] How do you view the warrant from a legal angle, since you are a judge? [Harun] It is largely weak, legally speaking, and does not show awareness of the reality. It ignores the truth of what is happening in Darfur. It is one of the tools of keeping up the pressure on the Sudanese Government and the Sudanese people. At this period, it has focused on, or aimed at, certain people, but of course the target is the Sudanese entity. I have read the warrant carefully, and it is clear that those who drafted it are not even good in the art of fabrication. This is simply because they have not conducted serious investigations in the field and have not used a scientific and justice-based approach. We were doing our duty of protecting the security of the country and the citizens. The war in Darfur was not absurd. The government did not send its troops and forces to Darfur simply to fight the people of Darfur. There was a rebellion against legitimacy. What is strange is that if such rebel groups were in the West, they would be viewed as terrorists simply for contemplating such actions, let alone what they did in Darfur. [....] [Bakhit] So what is the next step that you expect from the court at The Hague after issuing the resolution? [Harun] Of course, the resolution has used up all its legal options, and it must go back to the Security Council. Certainly, when it goes back to the Security Council, it will be surprised that Resolution 1553 has gone down to the dustbin of history. The resolution is unfair in the first place because in its paragraph that refers the situation in Darfur to the International Criminal Court [ICC], it excludes, in the next paragraph, the US and the non-signatory states from the jurisdiction of the court. Sudan is a non-signatory state. After all, if it is a domain of justice, why do they escape from it like a healthy person who escapes upon seeing another with scabies, while they want us to go there? Therefore, this decision is unfair and does not reflect a sound conscience of justice. [Bakhit] We have observed that you received the decision courageously. Where did you get this strength? You also gave examples and said: when they send [Ariel] Sharon to the ICC, then I will go to it. [Harun] The Sudanese personality is shaped through the history of the Sudanese people, which derives its pride from Caliph Abdallah, who faced his death while sitting on his prayer rug, and from all the national epics. The truth is that when a person has peace of mind towards his actions, any attempts to frighten him will mean nothing, especially if we realize that "if the entire nation assembles to give you something for your benefit, which God has not ordained, then they cannot do that, and if they assembly to harm you in a way that God has not ordained, they cannot do that. The pen [that writes the destiny of people] has finished writing and the ink is dry". [Part of a prophetic tradition] How do you explain the fact that the names of some people who belong to movements in Darfur and who fought and wounded a large number of troops from the regular forces and the people of Darfur have not been included? This is lack of balance, and this is the political process itself: continuing to put pressure on one side only and sending encouraging messages to the rebels to continue in their wrongdoing. This is the same scenario through which they foiled the Abuja negotiations and all the attempts to reach a peaceful solution in Darfur. At the same time, an international resolution is issued whenever there is any political action, round of negotiations, or the signing of a protocol on the question of Darfur. This is always accompanied or followed by an international resolution against Sudan. They do not want stability for us. [Bakhit] Many countries have confirmed that there has been no genocide. How do you explain what happened in Darfur? Is it really so or just a war between uncontrollable parties? You were a minister of state at the Interior Ministry at the time and your job was to maintain the security of your troops and the country in general. [Harun] The truth is that what happened in Darfur was at the hands of groups that carried weapons under political claims, at a time when the peace talks between the [Sudan] People's [Liberation] Movement [SPLM, the former rebels in southern Sudan] and the government had reached their end and consequently arranged the situation throughout Sudan. It was not a dialogue between the north and the south. It was a dialogue through which Sudan was placed at a new foundation, based on which all issues were put in order and answers were provided to all the critical questions that had always been a source of tension for our political life since the dawn of independence. [...] Our forces went to Darfur to protect its people from the oppression of their sons, who staged a savage rebellion. This rebellion did not adhere to any ethics of chivalry in fighting. They destroyed all means of life there, whether they are owned by persons or by the state. Let us assume that injustice was done to Darfur. Will what happened in Darfur remove that injustice? Whatever the gains that Darfur can make, can they make up for the scope of destruction, ruin, and loss that occurred in Darfur? [Bakhit] Mr Minister, you were a minister, and not a military commander who commands combat groups. Why were you specifically charged with these accusations? [Harun] In fact, I did not give this issue much thought. But I consoled myself by remembering that "the blood of all Muslims is equal, that the lowest Muslim in rank can give an assurance of protection for a non-Muslim, and that the Muslims are united against others." [Part of a prophetic tradition] As part of these international episodes of targeting, our consolation is that we are in the forefront. This is why I did not pay much attention to this hierarchy. [Bakhit] How long did you stay at the Interior Ministry? [Harun] Around three years. [Bakhit] Do you have statistics of the martyred and wounded policemen in Darfur? [Harun] I received statistics that indicate that there were 600 martyrs from the police and that 68 police centres were destroyed. They targeted these because they represent the authority in the rural areas. Of course, police stations in that area deal with regular security issues and they impose order in general. They are not combat units. Afterward, the figure exceeded thousands. The truth is that the police had been engaged in the most remarkable epics of sacrifice in Darfur. The sons of the police are the same sons of Darfur because recruitment in the police is local, especially the other ranks that are not officers. Is the guilt committed by those people that they wore the honourable uniform of the state, and thus they became a legitimate target and no one is crying over them in the international community? Where is their right to life? What guilt have they committed? In fact, the heroic acts and the spirit of sacrifice exhibited by the police in Darfur are one of the brightest episodes of our national history. [...] [Bakhit] What is the purpose of this? Is it coveting the Darfur wealth or targeting Sudan from the gateway of Darfur to undermine Arabism and Islam? [Harun] Of course, Sudan's geopolitical location, resources and policies are all a source of great strength for the Arab and Islamic nations and for Africa. Therefore, they do not want us to get rid of our problems. No sooner had we settled the question of the south than the Darfur rebellion broke out. When it was at its peak, plans got under way to prepare for the eastern front. Therefore, targeting Sudan is related to a conflict of major strategies, including French, US, Chinese, and other strategies. These are the reasons for the continuation of the Darfur issue and for a long period. [Bakhit] How do you view the current security situation in Darfur? [Harun] The situation is stable now. The past months, and contrary to what was reported by the foreign media, did not witness any major confrontations between our forces and the rebels. However, because the West has not yet achieved its goals from the Darfur problem, it will continue to depict the situation there as the worst on the security, humanitarian, and social levels in a bid to cloud the picture. [Bakhit] There is a position and a hidden role for international relief organizations. What is the position of the government towards them? [Harun] This is the most difficult equation. Although humanitarian work and its activists have humanitarian and charitable motives, there are many hidden agendas in it. It is no longer secret to anyone that humanitarian work has become one of the tools of foreign policy of nations. In many cases, it has exceeded its humanitarian frameworks to play highly politicized roles. Therefore, the equation needs some control. We will always work to keep it under control by emptying humanitarian work of its political agenda. We know that this is hard to do, but it is not impossible. [...] [Bakhit] We want to know who Ali Kushib is because he was accused along with a minister. [Harun] Don't raise this issue. [Bakhit] Are there indeed forces by the name of Janjawid that are affiliated with the government, as the armed movements and the international community claim? [Harun] The Janjawid is a term that was taken out of its historical context in Darfur. It was placed in a political context that gives a dimension of a name to the Darfur dispute. This is a very smart act for the Zionist media to give a name to the conflict. This agrees with the name image that exists in the United States for the Arabs and Muslims in the wake of the 11 September events to show that the Arabs are indeed that ugly and that America should continue its war and kill them, occupy them, and destroy their assets. [...] [Bakhit] The court at The Hague has for the first time demanded the trial of a group in whose country there is a war that has not ended. It is known that the work of the court begins after the end of the war and after the situation becomes clear and those responsible for the war from all sides are known. Why is it that the Security Council has acted hastily to form The Hague court for Sudan? [Harun] Perhaps, it views it as one of the tools of its political action, and not as a court of justice or law. No dispute in the world ended inside the courtroom. The truth of the logical order of these things is that the war should stop first by an effective cease-fire and both concerned parties adhere to it. This is followed by a negotiated political solution as a fixed step and social reconciliation and then accountability if necessary. These are the steps of peace processes all over the world. This is what we have tried in our problem with the People's Movement and it succeeded. The Security Council adopted it in its famous session in Nairobi concerning the comprehensive peace agreement and in New York, in the presence of Ali Uthman and John Garang. This is the natural order of such things. The Security Council started things in reverse order because it simply does not want stability in Sudan. What is the message it wants to send? That these movements can kill policemen and citizens and loot and spread chaos, while the government has no right to do anything and its leaders are sent to the dock? This is the reversed order of things, which can never be right. [Bakhit] Let us go back to the arrest warrant. What does it mean legally? [Harun] It is an order for arrest and detention pending trial. [Bakhit] So what is it that is expected after what happened? [Harun] I expect the court to return the file to the Security Council. [Bakhit] Don't you expect the Security Council to issue resolutions? [Harun] It is a political issue that is difficult to predict, ad it depends on local and international developments. [Bakhit] Will this arrest order be valid outside Sudan or inside it? [Harun] Of course, outside Sudan, because Sudan has not signed and is not a party to the procedures of the court and does not recognize any procedures that concern it. Of course, countries differ in terms of their recognition of the court at The Hague. [...] Source: Al-Quds al-Arabi website, London, in Arabic 28 May 07 B. MORE REACTIONS 1- Al-Ahram Weekly, Gamal Nkrumah "Oiling the wheels of greed: US President George W Bush has announced sanctions against Sudan while Khartoum remains unperturbed" http://weekly. 847 "It is a question of David taking on Goliath. Khartoum plays David and Washington plays Goliath: When Washington announced this week that it intends to freeze the assets of 31 government- affiliated Sudanese companies, most of them associated with the country's burgeoning oil sector, it was as if Goliath had decided to take on David, with Khartoum playing David and Washington Goliath. Washington purports to uphold the moral upper hand. For altruistic purposes it intends to intervene on the behalf of the hapless people of Darfur. More cynical observers, though, believe the move is simply part of America's strategy to lay its hands on Sudanese oil. The imposition of American sanctions against Sudan should be viewed in the context of the increasingly fierce competition between the US and China for control of Africa's oil wealth. [...] "These American measures come at a time when Sudan is actively discussing peace in Darfur and working on the hybrid force," says Sudanese Foreign Ministry spokesman Ali Sadig. "We invite the international community to ignore and condemn these sanctions," he added. Khartoum understands all too well that Washington is simply cutting off its nose to spite its face. American companies will be the biggest losers if unilateral sanctions are imposed. The US has also imposed a travel ban and froze the assets of three leading Sudanese politicians: Awad Ibn Ouf, Sudan's head of military intelligence and security chief, Minister of Humanitarian affairs Ahmed Haroun, who was in charge of Darfur between 2002 and 2004 and is accused by the International Criminal Court (ICC) and humanitarian relief agencies of arming, aiding and abetting nomadic Arab tribes in their attacks against Darfur's indigenous, non- Arab population, and Khalil Ibrahim, the head of the Darfur armed opposition group the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM). Ibrahim is known to be close to his ideological mentor, the leader of the opposition Popular Congress Party Sheikh Hassan Al-Turabi, Sudan's chief Islamist ideologue and influential former parliament speaker.? [....] 2. Human Rights Watch (Washington, DC) "Sudan: HRW Letter to the UN Security Council on Darfur"- 31 May 2007 Published by http//allafrica. " our Excellencies: We write to strongly urge the United Nations Security Council to take multilateral and decisive action to prevent the unacceptable human rights situation in Darfur from becoming worse and threatening the lives, homes, and security of tens of thousands of more people in Darfur and surrounding areas. The Security Council can and should act on its responsibility to protect civilians in Darfur and eastern Chad by establishing a mandatory "Darfur Recovery Fund" for Sudanese oil revenues under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. As an effective complement to the application of targeted individual sanctions against top Sudanese leaders responsible for Darfur policy, the Fund would limit the Sudanese government's ability to continue to finance its abusive practices in Darfur. The Fund would therefore increase the prospects for Khartoum's compliance with the Security Council's long-standing demands to end the massive human rights violations in Darfur. Since 2003, the Sudanese government has committed serious crimes in violation of international law against hundreds of thousands of civilians in Darfur. Two and half million people remain displaced, at least 200,000 have died and the abuses are far from over. Conditions in Darfur are deteriorating as Darfur residents continue to suffer grave human rights violations. Indeed, on May 9, 2007, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon expressed deep concern regarding indiscriminate and disproportionate aerial attacks carried out in North Darfur by Sudanese government helicopter gunships and Antonov aircraft in April, which killed and wounded civilians and destroyed property, school buildings, and livestock. The Secretary-General' already critical humanitarian situation, causing renewed displacement and spreading terror among the civilian population. [....] In establishing the Darfur Recovery Fund, it would be important for the Security Council to specify the actions required by the government of Sudan to rescind the mandatory fund procedure. These conditions should include: (1) Sudanese government consent to the full deployment of the African Union-United Nations protection force in Darfur with a mandate to take all necessary measures to protect civilians; (2) cessation of further financial and logistical support to the government-backed Janjaweed militias and cooperation with African Union and the United Nations on a genuine plan for their disarmament; (3) an immediate end to attacks on civilians by Sudanese armed forces and Janjaweed militias; (4) cooperation with the International Criminal Court in its investigations of crimes in Darfur and the execution of arrest warrants and transfer of suspects to the Hague; (5) full and unimpeded access to and within Darfur for Sudanese and international humanitarian workers, human rights organizations, and media. At such a time as the Security Council finds that these conditions have been met, the Darfur Recovery Fund would be terminated and any remaining proceeds distributed to qualifying recipients in accordance with the Fund's procedures. Once approved by the Security Council, the Darfur Recovery Fund would become binding on all UN member states, which would be called upon to assist in its implementation until the Sudanese government agrees to the expanded international force (including its civilian protection mandate and capacity) and the other civilian protection measures described above. In addition to authorizing the establishment of the Darfur Recovery Fund under Chapter VII, Human Rights Watch urges the Security Council to immediately apply the targeted sanctions established under resolution 1591 to senior government officials responsible for Darfur policy. The Security Council should also extend the arms embargo-currently limited to Darfur-throughout Sudan. Such actions by the Security Council would send a vital signal to both the Sudanese government and civilians in Darfur that the Security Council is united and committed to ending the crimes in violation of international law in Darfur and protecting civilians." [....]" 3. The Boston Globe "Seeking Sudan's pressure point" - May 31, 2007 http://www.boston. 05/31/seeking_ THE SANCTIONS on Sudan that President Bush announced Tuesday are justified as expressions of solidarity with the 2.5 million people of Darfur and eastern Chad who are trapped in refugee camps, prey to government-backed janjaweed militiamen, disease, and malnutrition. But there is no reason to believe the new sanctions are enough to compel Sudan's president, Lieutenant General Omar Bashir, to end the Darfur genocide. These latest sanctions are limited in scope, adding 30 Sudanese government-controll outfits that are already prohibited from trading with American companies or individuals or from using the US financial system. Sudan has long disdained such limited economic penalties -- as well as diplomatic pressure at the United Nations and an International Criminal Court indictment of two officials accused of furthering the ethnic cleansing, raping, and murdering in Darfur. [...] But China, with its large investments in Sudan's oil sector and its profits from arms sales to Khartoum, so far has run interference for Bashir. For his part, Bashir has thwarted a mandatory Security Council resolution from last August that authorized rapid deployment of 22,500 well-armed peacekeeping police to augment the overwhelmed 7,000 African Union observers who have hardly been able to protect themselves, much less the people of Darfur or humanitarian workers. China has the leverage America lacks. There are signs that officials in Beijing are beginning to get the message about their responsibility -- not from other governments but from a grassroots movement to shame China by characterizing the 2008 summer games in Beijing as the "genocide Olympics." In response, China has appointed a special envoy to Sudan, Lui Guijin, who returned from a recent trip to Darfur disputing reports from the United Nations and international aid groups. "I didn't see a desperate scenario of people dying of hunger there," he claimed. China's investments in Sudan, he said, "will fundamentally help Sudan address the conflicts and wars in Sudan." [....] Related links: i. INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY "Darfur Genocide Has 'Made In China' Label" May 30, 2007 http://www.investor ticle&id=2654181926 4- "Citizens for Global Solutions" President Bush finally moves beyond rhetoric on Darfur; Unilateral sanctions too little too late" May 30, 2007 "Washington, D.C. (Citizens for Global Solutions Press Release, 30 May) Citizens for Global Solutions is pleased that President Bush has once again used the bully pulpit to talk about Darfur. The president's statement today that he will impose sanctions on key Sudanese companies and individuals marks the second time in a month that he has announced stronger measures in response to Sudan's lack of action in ending the on-going atrocities in the Darfur region of the country. Following is a statement from Citizens for Global Solutions, Julia Fitzpatrick, a Herbert Scoville Peace Fellow at our organization: "After nearly three years of calling the systematic killing of Darfurians 'genocide', today President Bush finally decided that rhetoric was not enough. His unilateral actions, however, come too little, too late. This U.S.-only effort will not bring an end to atrocities in Darfur. "This is President Bush's moment of moral courage. His administration should do what it should have done years ago: Exert the leadership necessary to facilitate a strong and coordinated multilateral effort-including China, Russia and members of the European Union -- to bring the full weight of international pressure on the al-Bashir regime. President Bush and his administration should also offer to support the efforts of the ongoing International Criminal Court investigation in Darfur, especially in light of recently released arrest warrants. "Only multilateral sanctions and robust diplomatic efforts will end the senseless killings, provide a much-needed renewed and inclusive peace process and permit the prompt deployment of U.N. peacekeepers to protect the innocent people of Darfur." 5- Sudan Tribune (Sudan) http://www.sudantri "U.S. sanctions aimed at striking Sudan's economy, Bashir" - 1 June 2007 "Sudanese President Omer al-Bashir has stressed that the U.S. sanctions on Sudan were aimed at striking the economy in this African country, Sudan's Alwan daily reported on Thursday. "The American sanctions are aimed at striking and destroying Sudan's economy," the Sudanese president was quoted as saying. Al-Bashir made the remarks during a meeting with visiting delegation of U.S. businesspersons, according to the report. This was the first comment of Sudanese president on the Tuesday announcement by U.S. President George W. Bush on new sanctions on Sudan. He said that the continuous U.S. pressures on his country, and Bush's repeated threats of imposing sanctions on Sudan, were attempts of covering and hiding the crimes of the United States in Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine". The Sudanese president noted that the U.S. sanctions would affect directly the life of thousands of Sudanese families who were relying on the companies which had been named in the new U.S. sanction measures." [...] 1. "New US sanctions not the way to Darfur peace - Salva Kiir " June 1, 2007 http://www.sudantri U.S. sanctions imposed on Sudan will do nothing to help bring peace to the Darfur region, and will only hurt people in other parts of the country, Sudanese Vice President Salva Kiir Mayardit said Thursday. (....) C. OPINION ARTICLES 1. Sudan Tribune "US Sanctions: The South Sudan Prospective" June 1, 2007 http://www.sudantri By Steve Paterno "As of late, there has been tremendous effort and pressure to resolve the ongoing genocide in Darfur, which has thus far claimed many lives. Any day that goes by without any resolution, it means another score for the government in Khartoum and a lost for the international community while for the Darfurians it means more death and destruction. Anyway, the most anticipated tougher resolutions were expected of the U.S., which for years has been threatening to issue tougher measures against those involved in the ongoing genocide in Darfur. But finally, on May 29, President George W. Bush announced a series of economic sanctions tightening the already existing sanctions in Sudan and targeting certain individuals and corporations in Sudan as the concrete measures to deal with the violations of the heinous act of genocide in Darfur. Others hail Bush's measures as welcoming but many more said those measures are either not tougher enough and even many more said those measures are too little and just too late to have any impact. As for the people of South Sudan, what will economic sanctions on Sudan just mean for them? President Bush may just has the answer or would he not" CICC's policy on the referral and prosecution of situations before the ICC: The Coalition for the ICC is not an organ of the court. The CICC is an independent NGO movement dedicated to the establishment of the International criminal court as a fair, effective, and independent International organization. The Coalition will continue to provide the most up-to-date information about the ICC and to help coordinate global Action to effectively implement the Rome statute of the ICC. The Coalition will also endeavor to respond to basic queries and to raise Awareness about the ICC's trigger mechanisms and procedures, as they Develop. The Coalition as a whole, and its secretariat, do not endorse or promote specific investigations or prosecutions or take a position on Situations before the ICC. However, individual CICC members May endorse Referrals, provide legal and other support on investigations, or develop Partnerships with local and other organizations in the course of their Efforts. Communications to the ICC can be sent to: ICC P.O. box 19519 2500 cm the Hague The Netherlands |
|
|
