Download Committee on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice

Committee on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice
War Crimes Prosecution and Resistant States
Jordan
War crimes are defined as various crimes, such as genocide or the mistreatment of
prisoners of war, committed during a war and considered in violation of the conventions of warfare.
Crimes committed during war are violations of national and international law. Those crimes
committed against humanity represent the violation of human rights, a violation our world has seen
no end to. Whether it was during World War I, World War II, or in recent times, the heat of conflict
has caused numerous violations and instances of crime against laws and customs of war, peace, and
against humanity. Such crimes have not gone unpunished, however. Prosecution of those affiliated
with war crimes has been in place for decades, providing for the proper handling of the accomplices.
Consequently, there has been no end to controversy regarding proper prosecution. World War II
provides an appropriate example. After the war, some of those responsible for committing war
crimes during the Holocaust were brought to trial before the International Military Tribunal (IMT).
The trails, which took place in Nuremberg, Germany in 1945 and 1946, came to be known as the
Nuremberg Trials. The IMT tried 22 “major” war criminals on charges of crimes against peace,
crime against humanity, war crimes, and conspiracy to commit such crimes. The severity of
punishments varied among all those brought to trial. The hunt for German and Axis war criminals
continues today as postwar generations remain determined in prosecuting German perpetrators
("The Nuremberg Trials”). In 1999, a human rights report was published cataloguing the war crimes
committed during the Kosovo Conflict. This catalogue included mutilation, murder, and rape. While
the territory was still under Serbian control, the report says, human rights abuses were committed as
children, the elderly, and the disabled were deliberately killed. Refugees were also described as
being cruelly handled as many suffocated to death in crowded trains (“Horrors of Kosovo
revealed”). The arguments presented against prosecution are all of a similar nature. Countries argue
there to be a certain obligation or responsibility to intervene. Presently, the genocide going on in
Darfur, Sudan represent an instance where the Janjaweed and Sudanese government, who are
primarily responsible, remain in denial of any wrongdoing. With thousands killed and millions more
displaced and left to rely on food aid, not only is the obvious violation of human and victims’ rights
a war crime, but the resistance of the Sudanese government is as well. In Darfur, the system of rape
of women is used as a weapon of war, as many women have consequently developed HIV-Aids and
been left unable to treat their disease. Additionally, the bombing of civilians and villages serve as
other examples of war crimes being committed in Darfur (Grice). While excuses and arguments are
made regarding evidence and the lack of it, war crimes are by definition distinguishable and no
matter the level of resistance by those countries involved, prosecution must be carried out despite all
objection.
Prosecution must begin with the acknowledgment and awareness of all the aspects of a war
crime. This includes those who are guilty and the extent to which they have brought upon and
avoided their own prosecution. Jordan favors the just and rightful prosecution of individuals who
have committed war crimes. Human Rights Watch as well as Amnesty International believes that no
country should be exempt from proper prosecution. Along with its obligations to the Rome Statute
and ICC which call for the country’s acceptance of and involvement in all necessary war crimes
prosecutions, Jordan believes its strongest obligation is to international law ("Jordan: Parliament
Should Reject U.S. Impunity Deal"). One of the most urgent conflicts going on presently is the
genocide in Sudan. On October 31, 2007, Jordan took part in a conference to address the situation in
Darfur, Sudan. The conference, held in the Sudanese capital of Khartoum, was held to create
awareness about the humanitarian crisis in Darfur. On September 8, 2008, King Abdullah received
the Sudanese Justice minister Abdel-Baset Sabdarat. King Abdullah told Sabdarat that Jordan is
"keen on preserving the security and stability of Sudan as well as achieving national reconciliation
and strengthening peace all over Sudan (“Jordan monarch discusses ICC issue with Sudanese
envoy”). The King also talked about achieving national reconciliation and maintaining peace in all
Sudanese provinces (King Abdullah II). Jordan also has an obligation to the ICC in supporting the
court's intention to arrest Sudanese President Omer Hassan al-Bashir, although the Arab League
criticized the court's move knowing that the decision would take months to finalize. In addition,
although Sudan has not ratified the Rome Statue, as Jordan has, the statue's provisions may apply
where necessary to international peace and security (“Jordan monarch discusses ICC issue with
Sudanese envoy”).
Internationally, despite the vulnerabilities that Jordan’s policy of moderation and reason
present, it has established itself as a vital player in politics. One of the main reasons for its
prominent position is the country’s great respect for international legitimacy (Embassy of Jordan).
Jordan regards the traditions, beliefs, and policies of other countries with the same integrity with
which it considers its own priorities. Under King Abdullah, the country of Jordan voices its
commitment to peaceful settlements and its belief that legitimate international resolutions should be
the first step in resolving any conflict, whether that conflict requires swift and quick action or a
more drawn-out approach. As Jordan strongly believes in adherence to international law, it hopes for
other countries to practice the same adherence. In prosecuting countries that have committed war
crimes, Jordan proposes to stress adherence to the ICC. This court, responsible for trying persons
accused of the most serious crime of international concern, is capable of properly dealing with war
crimes such the genocide in Darfur. Jordan hopes to encourage that all countries respect the
existence and rulings of the ICC. It will do so by setting up a series of meetings in which the Rome
Statute will be reviewed and read over so that the definitions of genocide and crimes against
humanity are clear. Jordan feels that this sort of education will spread awareness that war crimes are
an issue that must be taken seriously and prosecution must be carried through with. Additionally,
this will hopefully encourage other nations to aid Sudan and the victims of the genocide. Jordan
cannot let nations escape prosecution of war crimes. Jordan hopes to combat the issue with a
combination of education, awareness and action.
Embassy of Jordan. 2008. 30 Sept. 2008 <http://www.jordanembassyus.org/new/index.shtml>.
Grice, Andrew. "Darfur: The evidence of war crimes." The Independent. 2 Aug. 2007. 18 Oct. 2008
<http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/darfur-the-evidence-of-war-crimes-459922.html>
"Horrors of Kosovo Revealed." British Broadcasting Company. 6 Dec. 1999. 13 Oct. 2008
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/551875.stm>.
"Jordan monarch discusses ICC issue with Sudanese envoy." Sudan Tribune. 9 Sept. 2008. 12 Oct.
2008 <http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article28559>.
"Jordan: Parliament Should Reject U.S. Impunity Deal." Human Rights Watch. 7
Dec. 2005. 22 Sept. 2008 <http://hrw.org/english/docs>.
King Abdullah II. 2008. Royal Hashemite Court. 18 Sept. 2008 <
http://www.kingabdullah.jo/homepage.php>.
Lauria, Joe, and Farah Stockman. "Aid Cuts Threatened by US Over War Crimes Tribunal." Boston
Globe. 5 Dec. 2004. The New York Times Company. 22 Sept. 2008
<http://www.boston.com/news/nation>.
"The Nuremberg Trials." United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. 16 Oct. 2008
<http://www.ushmm.org/outreach/wcrime.htm>.