A senior judge has resigned from one of the UN’s international courts in The Hague citing “shocking” political interference from the White House and Turkey. Christoph Flügge, a German judge, claimed the US had threatened judgesafter moves were made to examine the conduct of US soldiers in Afghanistan. Turkey’s government had earlier made “baseless” allegations to end the tenure of a Turkish judge sitting on a United Nations court known as the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals with the connivance of the UN, he claimed. Aydın Sefa Akay was removed following his arrest and subsequent release over alleged links to Fethullah Gülen, the US-based cleric blamed by the Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, for a failed coup attempt. “Turkey applied its veto against Judge Akay,” Flügge said. “We, the other judges, immediately protested. But his tenure was nevertheless not extended by the UN secretary general. And with that, he’s gone.” Flügge, who had been a permanent judge on the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) since 2008, told the German newspaper Die Zeit that he had concluded in the wake of the developments that the “diplomatic world” saw no value in an independent judiciary. He warned that the UN’s blind eye to Turkey’s intervention had set an alarming precedent. “Every incident in which judicial independence is breached is one too many,” he said. “Now there is this case, and everyone can invoke it in the future. Everyone can say: ‘But you let Turkey get its way.’ This is an original sin. It can’t be fixed.” Flügge said the attitude of the US administration to the international criminal court (ICC) in The Hague highlighted the danger. “John Bolton, the national security adviser to the US president, held a speech last September in which he wished death on the international criminal court,” he said. “If these judges ever interfere in the domestic concerns of the US or investigate an American citizen, he said the American government would do all it could to ensure that these judges would no longer be allowed to travel to the United States – and that they would perhaps even be criminally prosecuted. “The American security adviser held his speech at a time when The Hague was planning preliminary investigations into American soldiers who had been accused of torturing people in Afghanistan. The American threats against international judges clearly show the new political climate. It is shocking. I had never heard such a threat.” Flügge said the judges on the court had been “stunned” that “the US would roll out such heavy artillery”. “It is consistent with the new American line: ‘We are No 1 and we stand above the law,’” he said. https://www.theguardian.com/law/201...ical-interference-trump-administration-turkey
Bullying the Hague is not a good look.....makes us look like we have a lot to hide overseas which is probably true..we are saddled with leadership by insult and intimidation. I personally am sick of it
In case anyone wants to actually read the text of John Bolton's speech as referenced in the OP/article-rather than simply rush to judgment/blame against the current administration--that detail can be found here. Sounds like the US's non-cooperation with the ICC dates back to its inception. This is not a new position.
rush? it's a long drawn out collection of deeds over a two year period...Bolton wasn't speaking for us when the ICC was formed...there are quite a few of us that do not trust our foreign policy moves by the current administration...it's not like a person needs to make a snap judgement at this point...and yes..I do blame our current administration for our relationships with the international community..have since long before this article came to be
International Criminal Court constituted an assault on the constitutional rights of the American people and the sovereignty of the United States. This is from the article ….basically it's ok for us to go after Osama Bin Laden in Pakistan but not ok to go after a war criminal with a US passport stateside...DOUBLE STANDARD? We're number one so we get preferential treatment when it comes to international crime....as if international means every country EXCEPT the US....and yes folks...we influence foreign elections all the time
Yes, unless you were already familiar with the history of the country's interaction with and position toward the ICC, making claims based on the article quoted would qualify as "rushing to judgment". But if you're cool with that, who am I to judge?
every country in the world could claim this International Criminal Court is superfluous, given that domestic US judicial systems already hold American citizens to the highest legal and ethical standards.
Personally I think the world is long overdue for national cooperation across the globe and information sharing between govt's concerning crimes against humanity....I'm also a supporter of the Red Cross and Doctors without Borders...and the Tsi Chi Foundation for disaster relief....playing the constant nationalistic card is not getting us further from wars
Don't care enough to keep reading but if Turkey has the right to veto a judge then the others protesting shows they aren't very good judges but again...who cares?
The concept of having this international court that we as citizen of the US have no control over and the Constitution mean nothing never made any sense at all to me.
