 June
15, 2008 (WASHINGTON) – One of the registered counsels at the
International Criminal Court (ICC) described an attempt by the world
court to divert a plane carrying a Darfur war crimes suspect as
“illegal”.
Al-Hadi Shalluf The
French-Libyan born counsel Dr. Hadi Shalluf told Sudan Tribune in a
phone interview that diverting planes “is a violation of international
law because of the negative impact it has on civil aviation”.
“Even if it was done for the
purpose of applying the law it is still considered a criminal act” he
added.
Earlier this month the ICC
prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo told Sudan Tribune that the world court
attempted to divert a plane that carried Ahmed Haroun, state minister
for humanitarian affairs, on his way to Saudi Arabia in December to
perform the annual Islamic pilgrimage.
The plan was coordinated with a
number of unidentified countries. The Saudi government was made aware of
it, according to Ocampo.
Shalluf said that he is “very
surprised that the court would to resort to something disgraceful and
immoral like this. I condemn this act”.
He said that the operation
would have been legal only if the place landed at its destination and
then the ICC could have asked for extradition of Haroun. But he stressed
that only a State Party to the ICC is obliged to comply with such a
request.
The ICC counsel also said that
countries which were part of the plan “are in violation of civil
aviation treaties signed in Montreal and New York and any other
international conventions regarding safety of passengers”.
“The court’s mandate does not
include arresting suspects directly. The ICC can ask countries to
execute arrest warrants in accordance with Rome Statue. Otherwise the
court becomes a hijacking institution and a police institution” Shalluf
said.
The French advocate said his
position would have still been the same if the plane was carrying
Slobodan Milosevic or Radovan Karadzic.
He further said the plan if
successful would have created a “regional conflict and even war” between
Sudan and the countries that were enlisted for help in this operation.
“The ICC and its prosecutor
bear the full responsibility for this and the UNSC must investigate how
that was allowed to happen” he said.
SPECIAL COURT FOR DARFUR
Shalluf reiterated his position
that the ICC has no jurisdiction over the Darfur war crimes saying that
Sudan is not party to the Rome Statue which forms the basis of the
court.
Sudan has not ratified the Rome
Statue, but the (UNSC) invoked the provisions under the Statue in March
2005 that enables it to refer situations in non-State parties to the
world court if it deems that it is a threat to international peace and
security.
But Shalluf disputes this
interpretation saying that the UNSC can refer cases of countries that
are parties to the Rome Statue. He proposed a special court for Darfur
crimes consisting of Sudanese judges and submitted it to the P-5 members
of the UNSC as well as the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon.
Asked whether the special court
proposal is irrelevant after the report by the ICC prosecutor to the
UNSC in which accused the Sudanese state apparatus of covering up the
crimes committed in Darfur, Shalluf described Ocampo as being “out of
touch with reality”.
“The prosecutor does not deal
with the Darfur case realistically. He lives in his own bubble in
isolation from the international community. He does not understand the
true structure of the African continent or Sudan” he said.
“It is not for his place to
question the Sudanese judiciary or any other person for that matter.
Sudan is a sovereign state and recognized by the whole world. Sudan
judicial system is independent and fair” Shalluf added.
Shalluf said his proposal is
based on his belief that the Darfur case is “too complicated to be
handled by the ICC”.
“We asked for the formation of
a special court based in Sudan or any other African countries” he said.
Nigeria has made a similar
suggestion on a special court when the issue of the ICC and Darfur came
up in the UNSC in 2005 but it lacked support from Europe and Sudan
itself.
Shalluf also blamed the
Sudanese government “for failing to deal with the issue of Darfur
crimes. This why we saw what happened with the attack by Darfur rebels
on the capital”.
However the ICC counsel
acknowledged that he has not received any response from the P-5 or UN on
his proposal.
“Definitely I don’t expect
acceptance to this proposal for the time being. However I am positive
that it is being reviewed. The UNSC referring the Darfur case to the ICC
should be voided” Shalluf said.
CASE AGAINST THE ICC
Shalluf was appointed by the
court on August 2006 to represent and protect the general interests of
the defense in the Darfur case before the ICC during the proceedings on
the preservation of evidence and protection of witnesses.
The judges of the Pre-Trial
Chamber I of the ICC who were assigned the Darfur case, invited the
observations of Antonio Cassese the head of UN commission of inquiry on
Darfur and by Louise Arbour the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights
concerning the protection of victims and the preservation of evidence in
Darfur.
Shalluf filed a long series of
motions to challenge the jurisdiction of the Court and the admissibility
of the Darfur case at the ICC that were eventually rejected by the
judges.
The ICC registry also refused
to compensate him for his legal services from December 2006 to February
2007 on the grounds that he exceeded the scope of his mandate. The
judges said he presented baseless requests and motions. Furthermore they
described the filings made to challenge the jurisdiction of the ICC in
Darfur as “frivolous and vexatious”.
Shalluf filed a complaint with
European court of Human rights against the ICC and the European parties
to the Rome Statue saying that he was denied the right to appeal the
judges decision on his compensation.
“This is violation of European
law which states that any person should be entitled for a fair trial.
The right to appeal is cornerstone of a fair trial. The Rome Statue is
incomplete since it empowers the ICC chambers to review appeal requests
on cases they already rejected” he said.
“You don’t expect the same
court that denied a motion to accept a decision to appeal. This is a
serious defect in the Rome Statue” he said.
Shalluf said the case is still
pending before the European court.
The judges of the ICC issued
their first arrest warrants for suspects accused of war crimes in
Sudan’s Darfur region a year ago.
The warrants were issued for
Ahmed Haroun, state minister for humanitarian affairs, and militia
commander Ali Mohamed Ali Abdel-Rahman, also know as Ali Kushayb. Sudan
has so far rejected handing over the two suspects.
|
