International Court: More Study Needed On Thailand And I C C Jurisdiction

[webfact]

International Court: More study needed on Thailand and ICC jurisdiction

By Digital Media

BANGKOK, Nov 30 – The Foreign Ministry and other government agencies did not reach agreement on the ministry’s move to endorse the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC) over legal disputes in Thailand.

Foreign Minister Surapong Tovijakchaikul discussed the issue on Thursday with representatives from the Justice Ministry, the Council of State, the Department of Special Investigation and the Office of the Attorney General.

The meeting agreed to forward to the proposal to the 18-member Statute of the International Criminal Court Committee (SICCC), set up by the cabinet in 1999, for further study.

The director general of the Foreign Ministry’s Department of Treaties and Legal Affairs was assigned to coordinate with the SICCC.

When a resolution is achieved, it will be decided if the Foreign Ministry or the Justice Ministry is authorised to submit the issue to the cabinet for approval, said Mr Surapong.

He said the meeting agreed that Thai laws on extradition, criminal cooperation, prisoner transfer, and privilege and immunity must be amended to cover the ICC-stipulated offences.

Concerns from different quarters on the ICC jurisdiction will be discussed by the SICCC, he concluded. (MCOT online news)

-- TNA 2012-11-30

[bigbamboo]

This will run and run like 3G.

[Thai at Heart]

I think they need to read the articles of the ICC first, and that isn't the international cricket council.

[whybother]

the 18-member Statute of the International Criminal Court Committee (SICCC), set up by the cabinet in 1999

They haven't done much in 13 years.

[virtualtraveller]

Basically, you need to get the courts to agree on it because you are basically letting a foreign court tell you what to do, similar to Cambodia, and that will be the ultimate loss of face, so I doubt they will, besides you need the courts of the country to concede that they've failed, as yet that's not the case. If Thaksin's govt just go ahead and over-rule or side step them, you will see the courts move swiftly on cases to disband this govt for being a proxy. It's a no brainer, they are guilty as charged, the courts are just keeping it as a last resort.

[Renbe]

Thailand does very well to study this matter thoroughly. It is a huge step to hand over jurisdiction to a far away entity, while scores of other countries, amongst them the US< China, India and Israel have clearly refused to do so. The US has even a law that it can use force to "free" any American citizen that is indicted and under arrest by the court in Holland:

The U.S. opposed the ICC from the beginning, surprising and disappointing many people. Human rights organizations and social justice groups around the world, and from within the US, were very critical of the U.S. stance given its dominance in world affairs.

The U.S. did eventually signed up to the ICC just before the December 2000 deadline to ensure that it would be a State Party that could participate in decision-making about how the Court works. However,

• By May 2002, the Bush Administration “unsigned” the Rome Satute.
  
• The U.S. threatened to use military force if U.S. nationals were held at the Hague
  
• The U.S. continues to pressure many countries to sign agreements not to surrender U.S. citizens to the ICC.
  

On 3 August, 2002, U.S. President George Bush signed into law the American Servicemembers Protection Act (ASPA) of 2002

• The act was dubbed the “Hague Invasion Act” because, as Human Rights Watch commented, “The new law authorizes the use of military force to liberate any American or citizen of a U.S.-allied country being held by the court, which is located in The Hague.”
  
• In addition, “the law provides for the withdrawal of U.S. military assistance from countries ratifying the ICC treaty, and restricts U.S. participation in United Nations peacekeeping unless the United States obtains immunity from prosecution. At the same time, these provisions can be waived by the president on ‘national interest’ grounds.”
  

Edited November 30, 2012 by Renbe

[Zooheekock]

amongst them the US< China, India and Israel

Those are hardly countries whose human rights' record Thailand should aim to emulate.

It's not going to happen, which is awful. I'm not sure anything would have come of it but it would be a joy to see the generals and the elites at least face the possibility of being held accountable for their crimes.

[khunken]

I wonder if Supapong discussed it with his masters voice in Dubai?

[Thai at Heart]

Have they even asked anyone from the ICC in an off the record manner if this ifs possible?

I feel another interpol moment coming on here.

[Moruya]

I wonder if Supapong discussed it with his masters voice in Dubai?

Thinking about it, this whole concept is just kicking a can down the road to be ultimately abandoned.

The PTP is just appeasing Thida and her collection of vermilion eunuch gargoyles.

[virtualtraveller]

It's such a silly waste of time, Thailand would never surrender sovereignty to the ICC, if this govt did there would be a coup, not because the generals fear being put on trial but because so many influential people would find it the ultimate insult. It basically suggests you a dysfunctional country where law and order has totally broken down, and to do would pretty much open your doors to foreign courts inspecting your dirty laundry, including all the dodgy things committed by both sides. Surely someone among the Reds/PT isn't stupid enough to realise that they are just as implicated in the Ratchaprasong deaths. This is all hot air because Thaksin promised the UDD he would try get the govt to do something, he forgot to point out to the UDD that they themselves would likely be investigated in the trial.

[Thai at Heart]

It's such a silly waste of time, Thailand would never surrender sovereignty to the ICC, if this govt did there would be a coup, not because the generals fear being put on trial but because so many influential people would find it the ultimate insult. It basically suggests you a dysfunctional country where law and order has totally broken down, and to do would pretty much open your doors to foreign courts inspecting your dirty laundry, including all the dodgy things committed by both sides. Surely someone among the Reds/PT isn't stupid enough to realise that they are just as implicated in the Ratchaprasong deaths. This is all hot air because Thaksin promised the UDD he would try get the govt to do something, he forgot to point out to the UDD that they themselves would likely be investigated in the trial.

Indeed. They won't even let me own a blade of grass. Anyone think they are really going to let a foreign court and jurisdiction here?

[Baerboxer]

amongst them the US< China, India and Israel

Those are hardly countries whose human rights' record Thailand should aim to emulate.

It's not going to happen, which is awful. I'm not sure anything would have come of it but it would be a joy to see the generals and the elites at least face the possibility of being held accountable for their crimes.

It would be good to see them held accountable in Thailand, by a Thai court supported by a robust constitution backed by all Thai citizens. "Outsourcing" to the ICC is not the answer. What has the ICC actually delivered?

The 2 world superpowers don't support the idea. It's about as effective as the UN.

[Thai at Heart]

amongst them the US< China, India and Israel

Those are hardly countries whose human rights' record Thailand should aim to emulate.

It's not going to happen, which is awful. I'm not sure anything would have come of it but it would be a joy to see the generals and the elites at least face the possibility of being held accountable for their crimes.

It would be good to see them held accountable in Thailand, by a Thai court supported by a robust constitution backed by all Thai citizens. "Outsourcing" to the ICC is not the answer. What has the ICC actually delivered?

The 2 world superpowers don't support the idea. It's about as effective as the UN.

Going thorough the minutiae of what orders were given or signed means nothing. The response of the government leaders at the time was justified in my opinion.

Now, trying to judge an individual soldiers actions on a day is nonsense. The dems had no choice.

[Soi Dog]

What makes them think the ICC will be able to get any more facts out than are already available (e.g. none)? Meanwhile, the nation is up in arms about a few tear gas grenades aimed at thugs charging a police barrier. Much better to have snipers shooting "blanks".

[Credo]

Indeed. They won't even let me own a blade of grass. Anyone think they are really going to let a foreign court and jurisdiction here?

They certainly will if the court rules in their favor.

[billd766]

I wonder if Supapong discussed it with his masters voice in Dubai?