Baby born in midair on London to Boston flight
Oct 2nd 2006 | 7:35 am
#106
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Baby born in midair on London to Boston flight
On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 12:11:35 -0400, "Sancho Panza"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"Hatunen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected].. .
>> On Sun, 1 Oct 2006 16:17:07 -0400, "Sancho Panza"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>Maybe you ought to tell that to the ICJ: "The Court has a dual role: to
>>>settle in accordance with international law the legal disputes submitted
>>>to
>>>it by States. . . ."
>>>Its top case case is indicative: "
>>>Twelve cases are currently pending:
>>>1. Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the
>>>Crime of Genocide
>>>(Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro)"
>> Do note that this is a United Nations covention which can be
>> imposed unilaterally on nations. It was passed in 1951, a time
>> when none of the parties to that suit were nations or members of
>> the UN. Whether actions of the UN can be called "laws" is
>> arguable. Various antions, including the USA opt out f them
>> anytime it suits them.
>>>And then there are always the interesting cases like the prosecution of
>>>Milosevic and colleagues and the holding of Augusto Pinochet.
>> Pinochet was arrested and prosecuted under the laws of the United
>> Kingdom and Spain, not international law.
>Yet international law governed his return to Chile.
What law? Be specific.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"Hatunen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected].. .
>> On Sun, 1 Oct 2006 16:17:07 -0400, "Sancho Panza"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>Maybe you ought to tell that to the ICJ: "The Court has a dual role: to
>>>settle in accordance with international law the legal disputes submitted
>>>to
>>>it by States. . . ."
>>>Its top case case is indicative: "
>>>Twelve cases are currently pending:
>>>1. Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the
>>>Crime of Genocide
>>>(Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro)"
>> Do note that this is a United Nations covention which can be
>> imposed unilaterally on nations. It was passed in 1951, a time
>> when none of the parties to that suit were nations or members of
>> the UN. Whether actions of the UN can be called "laws" is
>> arguable. Various antions, including the USA opt out f them
>> anytime it suits them.
>>>And then there are always the interesting cases like the prosecution of
>>>Milosevic and colleagues and the holding of Augusto Pinochet.
>> Pinochet was arrested and prosecuted under the laws of the United
>> Kingdom and Spain, not international law.
>Yet international law governed his return to Chile.
What law? Be specific.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Oct 2nd 2006 | 8:13 am
#107
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Baby born in midair on London to Boston flight
"Hatunen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 12:11:35 -0400, "Sancho Panza"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>"Hatunen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]. ..
>>> On Sun, 1 Oct 2006 16:17:07 -0400, "Sancho Panza"
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>Maybe you ought to tell that to the ICJ: "The Court has a dual role: to
>>>>settle in accordance with international law the legal disputes submitted
>>>>to
>>>>it by States. . . ."
>>>>Its top case case is indicative: "
>>>>Twelve cases are currently pending:
>>>>1. Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the
>>>>Crime of Genocide
>>>>(Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro)"
>>> Do note that this is a United Nations covention which can be
>>> imposed unilaterally on nations. It was passed in 1951, a time
>>> when none of the parties to that suit were nations or members of
>>> the UN. Whether actions of the UN can be called "laws" is
>>> arguable. Various antions, including the USA opt out f them
>>> anytime it suits them.
>>>>And then there are always the interesting cases like the prosecution of
>>>>Milosevic and colleagues and the holding of Augusto Pinochet.
>>> Pinochet was arrested and prosecuted under the laws of the United
>>> Kingdom and Spain, not international law.
>>Yet international law governed his return to Chile.
> What law? Be specific.
Welcome to the doctrine of universality:
'Todavía es más claro el papel del internacionalismo judicial en elcaso de
Cavallo. Disfrazado de empresario eficaz y probo (esto último quizá no
tanto, porque la licitación correspondiente fue arreglada por el gobierno
mexicano), el antiguo teniente de fragata, miembro del equipo que
secuestraba, torturaba, hacía desaparecer a sus víctimasy se quedaba con sus
niños y sus bienes materiales, era en México director del Registro Nacional
de Vehículos, extremo de la privatización pues una función pública
concerniente a la seguridad pública y aun a la seguridad nacional había sido
entregado a particulares. Cuando se descubrió que el ejecutivo y el
torturador eran una y la misma persona, un pedido español relativo a
crímenes cometidos en Argentina fueatendido en México y hoy Cavallo está
sometido a juicio en Madrid.
Aunque en caso de ser condenado el exmarino cumplirá sólo una penade 30 años
de prisión (el máximo que establecía la ley española en la época en que
delinquió), la acusación pidió el miércoles pasado, formalmente, sanciones
que oscilan entre 13 mil 300 y 17 mil años de prisión. La cifra es aberrante
porque refleja una situación aberrante, la que permitió a Cavallo y al resto
de los torturadores de la Escuela de Mecánica de la Armada y al golpismo
argentino rampante entre 1976 y 1982 cometer los delitos de genocidio,
terrorismo, torturas y crímenes de lesa humanidad. Sumadas las condenas que
merecería cada casoprotagonizado por Cavallo resulta ese fantástico.
desorbitado, esperpéntico número de años. Esperpéntico, desorbitado y
fantástico, pero justo si pudiera cumplirse. La justicia podrá elegir entre
la cifra mayor o la menor según se considere, por un lado. que hubo
genocidio yterrorismo en concurso con tortura, homicidio y lesiones, o más
ampliamente, delitos de lesa humanidad y terrorismo: y, por otro lado. según
se aplique la legislación vigente entonces o la actual, dependiendo de cuál
sea más benévola con el acusado, según el principio clásico del derecho
penal.
Del amplísimo conjunto de documentos y testimonios recogidos por la
Audiencia Nacional (el órgano español de acusación), la fiscal Dolores
Delgado extrajo una conclusión, pertinente para el caso mexicano:cuando las
fuerzas armadas dieron el golpe de marzo de 1976, no sólose propusieron
derrocar a la presidenta heredera, Isabelita Perón. "sino también ...
diseñar, desarrollar y ejecutar un plan sistemático de desaparición y
eliminación física de una considerable parte de la ciudadanía, que reputaban
incompatible con su proyecto político y social, seleccionada en función de
su adscripción a determinados sectores, y por motivos ideológicos,
políticos, étnicos y religiosos".
En cambio, en México la lucha por castigar acciones represivas comparables a
la que avanza en Chile y Argentina, y a diferencia de lo que ocurre en esos
lugares, no cuenta con tribunales abiertos a los aires de la legislación
penal internacional. La justicia aldeana y codiguera, es decir cerrada en sí
misma y en la aplicación letrística de la ley resulta de ese modo unida a
los propósitos, explícitos a veces, de olvidar el pasado en beneficio de la
unidad nacional. Repetidamente, frente a los casos que les expone la
fiscalía que indaga los delitos de la guerra sucia, los tribunales federales
y la Suprema Corte de Justicia rehúsan admitir la vigencia de la Convención
sobre Imprescriptibilidad de los Crímenes de Lesa Humanidad. Abierta a firma
en la Asamblea General de la ONU el 26 de noviembre de 1968 y en vigor desde
el 11 de noviembre de 1970 (por lo que estaba vigente en junio de1971), esa
convención no fue ratificada a plenitud por México. Pero no la admitió con
reservas, sino que pretendió ceñirla a través de una declaración
interpretativa que, según informa el Comité 68. la agrupación de antiguos
combatientes civiles, dispuesta a hacerse justiciano por propia mano sino
con la ley en ella. ni siquiera figuraba en el decreto por el que se
promulgó la Convención. sino que "fue introducida de manera oficiosa, opaca
y espuria a través de una fe de erratas publicada en el Diario Oficial de la
Federación".
Pero no sólo padece tal defecto de forma. Razona el Comité 68 que conforme
al artículo 53 de la Convención de Viena sobre el derecho delos tratados,
"tal declaración interpretativa es nula de pleno derecho y no puede ni debe
surtir efecto legal alguno, en virtud de que está en oposición a una norma
imperativa de derecho internacional general, como lo es el principio ius
cogens de imprescriptibilidad de los crímenes de lesa humanidad, mismo que
ha sido aceptado y reconocido por la comunidad internacional de Estados en
su conjunto como norma imperativa que no admite acuerdo en contrario y que
sólo puede ser modificada por una norma ulterior de derecho internacional
general que tenga el mismo carácter".
Ese principio fue acatado e invocado por la Suprema Corte de Argentina el 5
de mayo pasado, al declarar la inconstitucionalidad de las leyes de
obediencia debida y punto final (que preservaron la impunidad de los
represores como Cavallo). Dijo ese tribunal, citado por el Comité 68. "que
con estos ordenamientos de amnistía el Estado argentino estaba
contraviniendo los mandatos del derecho internacional de losderechos humanos
y los principios ius cogens del derecho penal internacional relativos a la
imprescriptibilidad, la investigación y el castigo a los autores de crímenes
de lesa humanidad".
Está pues vigente un derecho penal internacional. Y un derecho internacional
de los derechos humanos, que comprende el de las personas y los pueblos a
contar con justicia basada en el más amplio fundamento. Para que no siga
siendo una justicia aldeana y codiguera, para quela Suprema Corte diga lo
que es la Constitución y no sólo lea lo quedice, se requiere incorporar esa
visión internacional al atender losreclamos de las víctimas y deudos del
genocidio mexicano de los años sesenta y setenta."
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 12:11:35 -0400, "Sancho Panza"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>"Hatunen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]. ..
>>> On Sun, 1 Oct 2006 16:17:07 -0400, "Sancho Panza"
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>Maybe you ought to tell that to the ICJ: "The Court has a dual role: to
>>>>settle in accordance with international law the legal disputes submitted
>>>>to
>>>>it by States. . . ."
>>>>Its top case case is indicative: "
>>>>Twelve cases are currently pending:
>>>>1. Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the
>>>>Crime of Genocide
>>>>(Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro)"
>>> Do note that this is a United Nations covention which can be
>>> imposed unilaterally on nations. It was passed in 1951, a time
>>> when none of the parties to that suit were nations or members of
>>> the UN. Whether actions of the UN can be called "laws" is
>>> arguable. Various antions, including the USA opt out f them
>>> anytime it suits them.
>>>>And then there are always the interesting cases like the prosecution of
>>>>Milosevic and colleagues and the holding of Augusto Pinochet.
>>> Pinochet was arrested and prosecuted under the laws of the United
>>> Kingdom and Spain, not international law.
>>Yet international law governed his return to Chile.
> What law? Be specific.
Welcome to the doctrine of universality:
'Todavía es más claro el papel del internacionalismo judicial en elcaso de
Cavallo. Disfrazado de empresario eficaz y probo (esto último quizá no
tanto, porque la licitación correspondiente fue arreglada por el gobierno
mexicano), el antiguo teniente de fragata, miembro del equipo que
secuestraba, torturaba, hacía desaparecer a sus víctimasy se quedaba con sus
niños y sus bienes materiales, era en México director del Registro Nacional
de Vehículos, extremo de la privatización pues una función pública
concerniente a la seguridad pública y aun a la seguridad nacional había sido
entregado a particulares. Cuando se descubrió que el ejecutivo y el
torturador eran una y la misma persona, un pedido español relativo a
crímenes cometidos en Argentina fueatendido en México y hoy Cavallo está
sometido a juicio en Madrid.
Aunque en caso de ser condenado el exmarino cumplirá sólo una penade 30 años
de prisión (el máximo que establecía la ley española en la época en que
delinquió), la acusación pidió el miércoles pasado, formalmente, sanciones
que oscilan entre 13 mil 300 y 17 mil años de prisión. La cifra es aberrante
porque refleja una situación aberrante, la que permitió a Cavallo y al resto
de los torturadores de la Escuela de Mecánica de la Armada y al golpismo
argentino rampante entre 1976 y 1982 cometer los delitos de genocidio,
terrorismo, torturas y crímenes de lesa humanidad. Sumadas las condenas que
merecería cada casoprotagonizado por Cavallo resulta ese fantástico.
desorbitado, esperpéntico número de años. Esperpéntico, desorbitado y
fantástico, pero justo si pudiera cumplirse. La justicia podrá elegir entre
la cifra mayor o la menor según se considere, por un lado. que hubo
genocidio yterrorismo en concurso con tortura, homicidio y lesiones, o más
ampliamente, delitos de lesa humanidad y terrorismo: y, por otro lado. según
se aplique la legislación vigente entonces o la actual, dependiendo de cuál
sea más benévola con el acusado, según el principio clásico del derecho
penal.
Del amplísimo conjunto de documentos y testimonios recogidos por la
Audiencia Nacional (el órgano español de acusación), la fiscal Dolores
Delgado extrajo una conclusión, pertinente para el caso mexicano:cuando las
fuerzas armadas dieron el golpe de marzo de 1976, no sólose propusieron
derrocar a la presidenta heredera, Isabelita Perón. "sino también ...
diseñar, desarrollar y ejecutar un plan sistemático de desaparición y
eliminación física de una considerable parte de la ciudadanía, que reputaban
incompatible con su proyecto político y social, seleccionada en función de
su adscripción a determinados sectores, y por motivos ideológicos,
políticos, étnicos y religiosos".
En cambio, en México la lucha por castigar acciones represivas comparables a
la que avanza en Chile y Argentina, y a diferencia de lo que ocurre en esos
lugares, no cuenta con tribunales abiertos a los aires de la legislación
penal internacional. La justicia aldeana y codiguera, es decir cerrada en sí
misma y en la aplicación letrística de la ley resulta de ese modo unida a
los propósitos, explícitos a veces, de olvidar el pasado en beneficio de la
unidad nacional. Repetidamente, frente a los casos que les expone la
fiscalía que indaga los delitos de la guerra sucia, los tribunales federales
y la Suprema Corte de Justicia rehúsan admitir la vigencia de la Convención
sobre Imprescriptibilidad de los Crímenes de Lesa Humanidad. Abierta a firma
en la Asamblea General de la ONU el 26 de noviembre de 1968 y en vigor desde
el 11 de noviembre de 1970 (por lo que estaba vigente en junio de1971), esa
convención no fue ratificada a plenitud por México. Pero no la admitió con
reservas, sino que pretendió ceñirla a través de una declaración
interpretativa que, según informa el Comité 68. la agrupación de antiguos
combatientes civiles, dispuesta a hacerse justiciano por propia mano sino
con la ley en ella. ni siquiera figuraba en el decreto por el que se
promulgó la Convención. sino que "fue introducida de manera oficiosa, opaca
y espuria a través de una fe de erratas publicada en el Diario Oficial de la
Federación".
Pero no sólo padece tal defecto de forma. Razona el Comité 68 que conforme
al artículo 53 de la Convención de Viena sobre el derecho delos tratados,
"tal declaración interpretativa es nula de pleno derecho y no puede ni debe
surtir efecto legal alguno, en virtud de que está en oposición a una norma
imperativa de derecho internacional general, como lo es el principio ius
cogens de imprescriptibilidad de los crímenes de lesa humanidad, mismo que
ha sido aceptado y reconocido por la comunidad internacional de Estados en
su conjunto como norma imperativa que no admite acuerdo en contrario y que
sólo puede ser modificada por una norma ulterior de derecho internacional
general que tenga el mismo carácter".
Ese principio fue acatado e invocado por la Suprema Corte de Argentina el 5
de mayo pasado, al declarar la inconstitucionalidad de las leyes de
obediencia debida y punto final (que preservaron la impunidad de los
represores como Cavallo). Dijo ese tribunal, citado por el Comité 68. "que
con estos ordenamientos de amnistía el Estado argentino estaba
contraviniendo los mandatos del derecho internacional de losderechos humanos
y los principios ius cogens del derecho penal internacional relativos a la
imprescriptibilidad, la investigación y el castigo a los autores de crímenes
de lesa humanidad".
Está pues vigente un derecho penal internacional. Y un derecho internacional
de los derechos humanos, que comprende el de las personas y los pueblos a
contar con justicia basada en el más amplio fundamento. Para que no siga
siendo una justicia aldeana y codiguera, para quela Suprema Corte diga lo
que es la Constitución y no sólo lea lo quedice, se requiere incorporar esa
visión internacional al atender losreclamos de las víctimas y deudos del
genocidio mexicano de los años sesenta y setenta."
Oct 2nd 2006 | 8:41 am
#108
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Baby born in midair on London to Boston flight
On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 16:13:48 -0400, "Sancho Panza"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"Hatunen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected].. .
>> On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 12:11:35 -0400, "Sancho Panza"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>Yet international law governed his return to Chile.
>> What law? Be specific.
>Welcome to the doctrine of universality:
I meant the citations. What law is it? Code and section? A
doctrine isn't a law, but it can be made one.
Spain demanded his extradition from the UK under normal extradion
treaty, but the UK resisted. Spain wanted to try him for torture
of *Spanish citizens*. The House of Lords found he could be
extradited to Spain.
But Pinochet went back to Chile on his own volition. it wasn't
covered by any sort of law at all.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"Hatunen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected].. .
>> On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 12:11:35 -0400, "Sancho Panza"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>Yet international law governed his return to Chile.
>> What law? Be specific.
>Welcome to the doctrine of universality:
I meant the citations. What law is it? Code and section? A
doctrine isn't a law, but it can be made one.
Spain demanded his extradition from the UK under normal extradion
treaty, but the UK resisted. Spain wanted to try him for torture
of *Spanish citizens*. The House of Lords found he could be
extradited to Spain.
But Pinochet went back to Chile on his own volition. it wasn't
covered by any sort of law at all.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Nov 15th 2006 | 10:27 am
#109
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Baby born in midair on London to Boston flight
"Hatunen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 16:13:48 -0400, "Sancho Panza"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >"Hatunen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected].. .
> >> On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 12:11:35 -0400, "Sancho Panza"
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Yet international law governed his return to Chile.
> >>
> >> What law? Be specific.
> >
> >Welcome to the doctrine of universality:
> I meant the citations. What law is it? Code and section? A
> doctrine isn't a law, but it can be made one.
"Under international law states can enact national laws that will allow
their national courts to investigate and, if there is sufficient admissible
evidence, prosecute any person who enters their territory suspected of
certain crimes, regardless of where the crime was committed and the
nationality of the accused and the victim.
Since the Second World War, more than a dozen states have conducted
investigations, commenced prosecutions and completed trials based on
universal jurisdiction for the crimes or arrested people with a view to
extraditing the persons to a state that will prosecute. These states
include: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany,
Israel, Mexico, Netherlands, Senegal, Spain, Switzerland, the United
Kingdom, the United States.
Universal jurisdiction can apply to genocide, crimes against humanity, war
crimes, torture, extrajudicial execution and "disappearances" as the most
serious crimes under international law as well as to ordinary crimes under
national law such as murder, abduction, assault and rape. In a recent
worldwide study of national laws, Amnesty International found that over 125
states had laws providing for universal jurisdiction over certain conduct
amounting to at least one of the crimes (for the full study see Universal
Jurisdiction: The duty of states to enact and enforce legislation). However,
no state has universal jurisdiction for all the crimes and many of the
existing laws are flawed."
Amnesty International
Universal Jurisdiction Cases
Amnesty International's research of national universal jurisdiction shows
that since the end of the Second World War more than a dozen states have
conducted investigations, commenced prosecutions and completed trials based
on universal jurisdiction for the crimes (genocide, crimes against humanity,
war crimes, torture, extrajudicial executions and "disappearances") or
arrested people with a view to extraditing the persons to a state that will
prosecute. These states include: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada,
Denmark, France, Germany, Israel, Mexico, Netherlands, Senegal, Spain,
Switzerland, the United Kingdom, the United States. Details of these cases
are included in Amnesty International's Universal Jurisdiction: the duty of
states to enact and implement legislation (AI Index: IOR 53/002-018/2001).
Amnesty International has also issued other documents, public statements and
press releases on the following cases:
The Hissein Habre Case
Date Title AI Index: Language
16 October 2001 Chad:Campaigning for justice AFR 20/05/01 English
Espanol Francais
16 October 2001 Chad: The Habre Legacy AFR 20/04/01 English
Francais
The Pinochet Case
Date Title AI Index: Language
25 September 1998 European states protect human rights? The visit of
General Augusto Pinochet to Europe AMR 22/09/98 English
<much snipped>
11 September 2001 Chile: Commitments must be fulfilled AMR 22/13/01
English
Espanol
Other universal jurisdiction cases
Date Title AI Index: Language
1 September 2000 Mexico: no safe haven for torturers AMR 41/48/00
English
Espanol
14 December 2000 Spain/Guatemala: Universal Jurisdiction should apply
to crimes against humanity EUR 41/15/2000 English
5 February 2001 Mexico/ Argentina / Spain : Extradition decision
raises hopes in the struggle against impunity AMR 41/06/01
English
Espanol
8 June 2001 Rwanda: Belgian court judgment is a great step in the fight
against impunity AFR 47/01/01 English
Espanol
3 October 2001 Amnesty International urges investigation of Ariel
Sharon MDE 15/89/01 English
Espanol Francais
16 October 2001 Peru/Japan: Former Peruvian President must be
brought to justice for human rights violations AMR 46/18/01
English
Espanol
1 May 2002 Belgian court has jurisdiction in Sharon case to investigate
1982 Sabra and Chatila killings IOR 53/01/02 English
Espanol Francais
1 February 2003 Belgian prosecutors can investigate crimes under
international law committed abroad IOR 53/001/2003 English
Espanol
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 16:13:48 -0400, "Sancho Panza"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >"Hatunen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected].. .
> >> On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 12:11:35 -0400, "Sancho Panza"
> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Yet international law governed his return to Chile.
> >>
> >> What law? Be specific.
> >
> >Welcome to the doctrine of universality:
> I meant the citations. What law is it? Code and section? A
> doctrine isn't a law, but it can be made one.
"Under international law states can enact national laws that will allow
their national courts to investigate and, if there is sufficient admissible
evidence, prosecute any person who enters their territory suspected of
certain crimes, regardless of where the crime was committed and the
nationality of the accused and the victim.
Since the Second World War, more than a dozen states have conducted
investigations, commenced prosecutions and completed trials based on
universal jurisdiction for the crimes or arrested people with a view to
extraditing the persons to a state that will prosecute. These states
include: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany,
Israel, Mexico, Netherlands, Senegal, Spain, Switzerland, the United
Kingdom, the United States.
Universal jurisdiction can apply to genocide, crimes against humanity, war
crimes, torture, extrajudicial execution and "disappearances" as the most
serious crimes under international law as well as to ordinary crimes under
national law such as murder, abduction, assault and rape. In a recent
worldwide study of national laws, Amnesty International found that over 125
states had laws providing for universal jurisdiction over certain conduct
amounting to at least one of the crimes (for the full study see Universal
Jurisdiction: The duty of states to enact and enforce legislation). However,
no state has universal jurisdiction for all the crimes and many of the
existing laws are flawed."
Amnesty International
Universal Jurisdiction Cases
Amnesty International's research of national universal jurisdiction shows
that since the end of the Second World War more than a dozen states have
conducted investigations, commenced prosecutions and completed trials based
on universal jurisdiction for the crimes (genocide, crimes against humanity,
war crimes, torture, extrajudicial executions and "disappearances") or
arrested people with a view to extraditing the persons to a state that will
prosecute. These states include: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada,
Denmark, France, Germany, Israel, Mexico, Netherlands, Senegal, Spain,
Switzerland, the United Kingdom, the United States. Details of these cases
are included in Amnesty International's Universal Jurisdiction: the duty of
states to enact and implement legislation (AI Index: IOR 53/002-018/2001).
Amnesty International has also issued other documents, public statements and
press releases on the following cases:
The Hissein Habre Case
Date Title AI Index: Language
16 October 2001 Chad:Campaigning for justice AFR 20/05/01 English
Espanol Francais
16 October 2001 Chad: The Habre Legacy AFR 20/04/01 English
Francais
The Pinochet Case
Date Title AI Index: Language
25 September 1998 European states protect human rights? The visit of
General Augusto Pinochet to Europe AMR 22/09/98 English
<much snipped>
11 September 2001 Chile: Commitments must be fulfilled AMR 22/13/01
English
Espanol
Other universal jurisdiction cases
Date Title AI Index: Language
1 September 2000 Mexico: no safe haven for torturers AMR 41/48/00
English
Espanol
14 December 2000 Spain/Guatemala: Universal Jurisdiction should apply
to crimes against humanity EUR 41/15/2000 English
5 February 2001 Mexico/ Argentina / Spain : Extradition decision
raises hopes in the struggle against impunity AMR 41/06/01
English
Espanol
8 June 2001 Rwanda: Belgian court judgment is a great step in the fight
against impunity AFR 47/01/01 English
Espanol
3 October 2001 Amnesty International urges investigation of Ariel
Sharon MDE 15/89/01 English
Espanol Francais
16 October 2001 Peru/Japan: Former Peruvian President must be
brought to justice for human rights violations AMR 46/18/01
English
Espanol
1 May 2002 Belgian court has jurisdiction in Sharon case to investigate
1982 Sabra and Chatila killings IOR 53/01/02 English
Espanol Francais
1 February 2003 Belgian prosecutors can investigate crimes under
international law committed abroad IOR 53/001/2003 English
Espanol
Nov 15th 2006 | 1:15 pm
#110
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Baby born in midair on London to Boston flight
On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 18:27:44 -0500, "Sancho Panza"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"Hatunen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected].. .
>> On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 16:13:48 -0400, "Sancho Panza"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >"Hatunen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >news:[email protected].. .
>> >> On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 12:11:35 -0400, "Sancho Panza"
>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>Yet international law governed his return to Chile.
>> >>
>> >> What law? Be specific.
>> >
>> >Welcome to the doctrine of universality:
>> I meant the citations. What law is it? Code and section? A
>> doctrine isn't a law, but it can be made one.
>"Under international law states can enact national laws that will allow
>their national courts to investigate and, if there is sufficient admissible
>evidence, prosecute any person who enters their territory suspected of
>certain crimes, regardless of where the crime was committed and the
>nationality of the accused and the victim.
Quotes like that are useless unless you tell us what is being
quoted.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
<[email protected]> wrote:
>"Hatunen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected].. .
>> On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 16:13:48 -0400, "Sancho Panza"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >"Hatunen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >news:[email protected].. .
>> >> On Mon, 2 Oct 2006 12:11:35 -0400, "Sancho Panza"
>> >> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>Yet international law governed his return to Chile.
>> >>
>> >> What law? Be specific.
>> >
>> >Welcome to the doctrine of universality:
>> I meant the citations. What law is it? Code and section? A
>> doctrine isn't a law, but it can be made one.
>"Under international law states can enact national laws that will allow
>their national courts to investigate and, if there is sufficient admissible
>evidence, prosecute any person who enters their territory suspected of
>certain crimes, regardless of where the crime was committed and the
>nationality of the accused and the victim.
Quotes like that are useless unless you tell us what is being
quoted.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Nov 15th 2006 | 5:55 pm
#111
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Baby born in midair on London to Boston flight
Hatunen wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 18:27:44 -0500, "Sancho Panza"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>"Under international law states can enact national laws that will allow
>>their national courts to investigate and, if there is sufficient admissible
>>evidence, prosecute any person who enters their territory suspected of
>>certain crimes, regardless of where the crime was committed and the
>>nationality of the accused and the victim.
>
A google search quickly found it
It's a quote from Amnesty International.
http://web.amnesty.org/pages/uj-index-eng
> On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 18:27:44 -0500, "Sancho Panza"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>"Under international law states can enact national laws that will allow
>>their national courts to investigate and, if there is sufficient admissible
>>evidence, prosecute any person who enters their territory suspected of
>>certain crimes, regardless of where the crime was committed and the
>>nationality of the accused and the victim.
>
A google search quickly found it
It's a quote from Amnesty International.
http://web.amnesty.org/pages/uj-index-eng
Nov 16th 2006 | 9:40 am
#112
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Baby born in midair on London to Boston flight
On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 22:55:44 -0800, Mike Hunt
<postmaster@localhost> wrote:
>Hatunen wrote:
>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 18:27:44 -0500, "Sancho Panza"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>"Under international law states can enact national laws that will allow
>>>their national courts to investigate and, if there is sufficient admissible
>>>evidence, prosecute any person who enters their territory suspected of
>>>certain crimes, regardless of where the crime was committed and the
>>>nationality of the accused and the victim.
>>
>A google search quickly found it
>It's a quote from Amnesty International.
>http://web.amnesty.org/pages/uj-index-eng
I don't see any laws there.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
<postmaster@localhost> wrote:
>Hatunen wrote:
>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 18:27:44 -0500, "Sancho Panza"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>"Under international law states can enact national laws that will allow
>>>their national courts to investigate and, if there is sufficient admissible
>>>evidence, prosecute any person who enters their territory suspected of
>>>certain crimes, regardless of where the crime was committed and the
>>>nationality of the accused and the victim.
>>
>A google search quickly found it
>It's a quote from Amnesty International.
>http://web.amnesty.org/pages/uj-index-eng
I don't see any laws there.
************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Nov 16th 2006 | 10:31 am
#113
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Baby born in midair on London to Boston flight
Hatunen wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 22:55:44 -0800, Mike Hunt
> <postmaster@localhost> wrote:
>
>
>>Hatunen wrote:
>>>On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 18:27:44 -0500, "Sancho Panza"
>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>"Under international law states can enact national laws that will allow
>>>>their national courts to investigate and, if there is sufficient admissible
>>>>evidence, prosecute any person who enters their territory suspected of
>>>>certain crimes, regardless of where the crime was committed and the
>>>>nationality of the accused and the victim.
>>A google search quickly found it
>>It's a quote from Amnesty International.
>>http://web.amnesty.org/pages/uj-index-eng
>
>
> I don't see any laws there.
Exactly the point I was trying to make. It's an opinion piece from AI,
not the most unbiased organization in the world.
> On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 22:55:44 -0800, Mike Hunt
> <postmaster@localhost> wrote:
>
>
>>Hatunen wrote:
>>>On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 18:27:44 -0500, "Sancho Panza"
>>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>"Under international law states can enact national laws that will allow
>>>>their national courts to investigate and, if there is sufficient admissible
>>>>evidence, prosecute any person who enters their territory suspected of
>>>>certain crimes, regardless of where the crime was committed and the
>>>>nationality of the accused and the victim.
>>A google search quickly found it
>>It's a quote from Amnesty International.
>>http://web.amnesty.org/pages/uj-index-eng
>
>
> I don't see any laws there.
Exactly the point I was trying to make. It's an opinion piece from AI,
not the most unbiased organization in the world.
