Bilateral accords with US on ICC cause Amnesty dismay

Date: 03/10/02

By David Cronin

AMNESTY International has voiced dismay over this week's decision by EU foreign ministers to give member states the go-ahead to sign bilateral accords with the US, ensuring that Americans cannot be brought before the International Criminal Court (ICC).

The human rights watchdog said that although the declaration announced on Monday (30 September) required EU countries not to enter into agreements with the US which would lead to impunity for those suspected of heinous crimes, it was worded in such a way that impunity could be the effect of bilateral transatlantic deals.

Amnesty is especially concerned that the decision does not stipulate that any such deals can allow the ICC to exercise jurisdiction in cases where courts in America decided not to prosecute or investigate those who have allegedly committed war crimes.

Dick Oosting, director of Amnesty's Brussels office, said: 'US pressure has paid off. The EU has allowed the US to shift the terms of the debate from legal principle to political opportunism.

'Accepting the principles of new bilateral agreements violates both the spirit and the letter of the Rome statute [on which the ICC was founded].'

However, Denmark's EU presidency has contended that the foreign ministers' declaration aimed at ensuring that the ICC, the first ever permanent tribunal dealing with war crime cases, was not undermined. The exemption from prosecution by the ICC envisaged by bilateral deals is designed only to cover soldiers and diplomats.

'I'm sure the US will accept the principle of no impunity,' said Per-Stig Moller, Denmark's foreign minister. 'The idea is that no one should go out as a free man after [perpetrating] an atrocity.'

Romania, which is alone among the countries bidding for EU membership in already signing a bilateral deal with the US over the ICC, has said it hopes America will view the Union's decision as a 'constructive solution'.

Hildegard Puwak, the country's Europe minister, added that she 'wouldn't exclude' reviewing aspects of Romania's treaty with the US. But the country's parliament would first wait for Washington's official reaction to the EU decision before discussing it, she said.

While Moller stressed that the EU's decision gave 'clear guidance' to both member states and candidate countries on any transatlantic agreements, he added: 'It's up to Romania to see if it wants to revise its agreement with the US after this.'

Britain and Italy have also indicated that they may be willing to formally grant the US assurances over the ICC.

Diplomats say their position is unlikely to be altered by Monday's decision, even though lawyers advising the Council of Ministers have previously declared that bilateral deals with Washington would be 'inconsistent' with the Rome statute.

US officials say that Washington plans to use the EU's guidelines as the basis for discussions with individual European countries on the ICC.

Yet Washington disagrees with the EU's legal advice that bilateral deals are incompatible with the Rome statute.

'We believe the current agreements that apply to American nationals are fully consistent with the other parties obligations under the Rome statute,' one US diplomat said.

Amnesty International has voiced dismay over the decision by EU foreign ministers to give Member States the go-ahead to sign bilateral accords with the US, ensuring that Americans cannot be brought before the International Criminal Court.

http://www.un.org/law/icc/ http://www.un.org/law/icc/

---