INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT AND PROSECUTION OF PUTIN
Whereas,
the leader of every nation should be subject to prosecution for international
crimes, including War Crimes, Crimes against Humanity, and Crimes of Aggression,
and no head of state should be immune from such prosecution, and
Whereas,
Russian President Vladimir Putin has threatened, planned, and carried out an
invasion and war against the nation of Ukraine and other actions in violation
of international law and the prohibition of Crimes against Humanity and against
Peace; and
Whereas,
one hundred twenty-three nations have joined the International Criminal Court following
the signing of the Rome Statute by the United States and other nations on
December 21, 2000 to create a Court having jurisdiction to prosecute such
crimes, and Russia, the United States, and China have not done so, and
Whereas,
the world can no longer tolerate lawless actions of international criminals which
threaten peace, human dignity, and global survival,
Now,
therefore, the undersigned citizens of the United States hereby call for
official action by the United States Congress and the President of the United
States to ratify the International Criminal Court statute, and call on the
Court to prosecute Vladimir Putin and any other head of state committing these grave
crimes under international law in the interests of all nations and peoples.
Thanks for working for a more
peaceful and just world.
PETITION FOR
PROSECUTION OF VLADIMIR PUTIN FOR WAR CRIMES
Whereas,
Russian President Vladimir Putin has threatened, planned, and carried out an
invasion and war against the nation of Ukraine and other actions in violation
of international prohibitions of crimes against humanity, war crimes, and
crimes of aggression; and
Whereas,
such actions are subject to prosecution in the International Criminal Court,
and in the courts of any nation whose laws prohibit such crimes under the
principle of universal jurisdiction provided in the Geneva Conventions of 1949.
Now,
therefore, We, the undersigned citizens, hereby call for
official action as follows:
1.For the prompt opening and conclusion of an
investigation of these actions by the prosecutor of the International Criminal
Court, and the commencement of prosecution by the Court including potential
detention of defendants.
2.For the prompt commencement of prosecution in
a U.S. federal court pursuant to Title 18 US Code, Section 2441 in the event
any national of the United States is injured by the criminal acts described
above.
3.For the full cooperation by the United States
and other governments in any proceedings for the enforcement of these
provisions of international law, and for other measures to bring a prompt halt
to the described violations in the interests of all nations and peoples.
When
completed, please forward this signed petition to the International Criminal
Court at otp.informationdesk@icc-cpi.int, and also provide a copy to
your elected representatives and to ProsecutePutin@gmail.com.
PDF (314KB)(PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.)Tip?
Shown Here: Introduced in House (02/12/2020)
116th CONGRESS 2d Session
H. RES. 855
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States should ratify the Rome Statute and join the International Criminal Court.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
February 12, 2020
Ms. Omar submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned
RESOLUTION
Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States should ratify the Rome Statute and join the International Criminal Court.
Whereas crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes are uniquely heinous and of global concern;
Whereas the United States has been a global leader in the field of international criminal justice for atrocity crimes since the Nuremberg Trials;
Whereas the fundamental principles of the rule of law and accountability for atrocity crimes are central to the United States values and interests at home and abroad;
Whereas the United States has demonstrated its commitment to these values and interests by tangibly supporting numerous domestic, international, and hybrid courts for atrocity crimes, including the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, the Special Court for Sierra Leone, the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, the Extraordinary African Chambers, and the Special Tribunal for Lebanon;
Whereas the United States further demonstrates this commitment by being party to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the United Nations Convention Against Torture, and the Geneva Conventions;
Whereas the United States further demonstrates this commitment by the existence of offices at the Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security that are dedicated to pursuing and apprehending the perpetrators of atrocity crimes, as well as the existence of a dedicated Office of Global Criminal Justice at the Department of State;
Whereas the United States signed the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court on December 31, 2000, but has yet to ratify the statute and join the Court as a full member;
Whereas the International Criminal Court is an important institution in the global fight against impunity for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide;
Whereas the International Criminal Court operates on the principle of complementarity and as a court of last resort;
Whereas because of these principles, cases are not admissible before the International Criminal Court where they are being genuinely investigated or prosecuted before domestic courts;
Whereas despite the United States not being a member of the Court, administrations of both political parties have recognized its utility for the national interests of the United States;
Whereas only by ratifying the Rome Statute and becoming a member of the International Criminal Court can the United States credibly shape the Court’s activities and priorities;
Whereas the vast majority of the United States oldest and closest allies are state parties to the International Criminal Court; and
Whereas it is in line with American values, interests, and proud history as a global leader in the fight against impunity and for justice that the United States becomes a full member of the International Criminal Court: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that—
(1) the United States Senate should ratify the Rome Statute;
(2) any visa restrictions put in place by the Department of State on International Criminal Court personnel should be lifted; and
(3) the United States should use its voice, vote, and influence in bilateral and multilateral relationships and institutions to encourage foreign countries that are not party to the International Criminal Court to join the International Criminal Court.
Statement of ICC Prosecutor, Karim A.A. Khan QC, on the Situation in Ukraine: Receipt of Referrals from 39 States Parties and the Opening of an Investigation
On 28 February, I announced my decision to seek authorisation to open an investigation into the Situation in Ukraine, on the basis of my Office's earlier conclusions arising from its preliminary examination, and encompassing any new alleged crimes falling within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court ("ICC" or "the Court").
In the same statement, I indicated that active investigations by my Office would be significantly expedited if a State Party to the Rome Statute (the "Statute") were to refer the situation to my Office, as provided in article 14 of the Statute.
Today, I can confirm that, my Office has received referrals of the Situation in Ukraine from the following 39 ICC States Parties: Republic of Albania, Commonwealth of Australia, Republic of Austria, Kingdom of Belgium, Republic of Bulgaria, Canada, Republic of Colombia, Republic of Costa Rica, Republic of Croatia, Republic of Cyprus, Czech Republic, Kingdom of Denmark, Republic of Estonia, Republic of Finland, Republic of France, Georgia, Federal Republic of Germany, Hellenic Republic, Hungary, Republic of Iceland, Ireland, Republic of Italy, Republic of Latvia, Principality of Liechtenstein, Republic of Lithuania, Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, Republic of Malta, New Zealand, Kingdom of Norway, Kingdom of the Netherlands, Republic of Poland, Republic of Portugal, Romania, Slovak Republic, Republic of Slovenia, Kingdom of Spain, Kingdom of Sweden, Swiss Confederation, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. These referrals enable my Office to proceed with opening an investigation into the Situation in Ukraine from 21 November 2013 onwards, thereby encompassing within its scope any past and present allegations of war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide committed on any part of the territory of Ukraine by any person.
I have notified the ICC Presidency a few moments ago of my decision to immediately proceed with active investigations in the Situation. Our work in the collection of evidence has now commenced.
As mentioned in my statement of 28 February, in its preliminary examination of the Situation in Ukraine, my Office had already found a reasonable basis to believe crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court had been committed, and had identified potential cases that would be admissible.
As I proceed to discharge my responsibilities, I will seek to engage with all relevant stakeholders and parties to the conflict, ensuring that investigations by my Office are conducted objectively and independently, with full respect for the principle of complementarity. In doing so, we will remain focused on our core objective: ensuring accountability for crimes falling within ICC jurisdiction.
The support of States Parties and the international community more broadly will be essential as we seek to meet the inherent challenges faced in the conduct of these investigations. I will therefore seek the partnership and contributions of all States in order to address our need for additional resources across all situations addressed by my Office.
With an active investigation now underway, I repeat my call to all those engaged in hostilities in Ukraine to adhere strictly to the applicable rules of international humanitarian law. No individual in the Ukraine situation has a licence to commit crimes within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.
Statement of International Criminal Court Prosecutor,
Karim A.A. Khan QC, on the Situation in Ukraine: “I have decided to proceed
with opening an investigation.”
Last Friday, I expressed my increasing concern, echoing
those of world leaders and citizens of the world alike, over the events
unfolding in Ukraine.
Today, I wish to announce that I have decided to proceed
with opening an investigation into the Situation in Ukraine, as rapidly as
possible.
Ukraine is not a State Party to the Rome Statute of the
International Criminal Court ("ICC" or the "Court"), so
cannot itself refer the situation to my Office. But it has twice exercised its
prerogatives to legally accept the Court's jurisdiction over alleged crimes
under the Rome Statute occurring on its territory, should the Court choose to
exercise it. The first
declaration lodged by the Government of Ukraine accepted ICC
jurisdiction with respect to alleged crimes committed on Ukrainian territory
from 21 November 2013 to 22 February 2014. The second
declaration extended this time period on an open-ended basis to
encompass ongoing alleged crimes committed throughout the territory of Ukraine
from 20 February 2014 onwards.
I have reviewed the Office's conclusions arising
from the preliminary examination of the Situation in Ukraine, and have
confirmed that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with opening an
investigation. In particular, I am satisfied that there is a reasonable basis
to believe that both alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity have been
committed in Ukraine in relation to the events already assessed during the
preliminary examination by the Office. Given the expansion of the conflict in
recent days, it is my intention that this investigation will also encompass any
new alleged crimes falling within the jurisdiction of my Office that are
committed by any party to the conflict on any part of the territory of Ukraine.
I have already tasked my team to explore all evidence
preservation opportunities. The next step is to proceed with the process of
seeking and obtaining authorisation from the Pre-Trial Chamber of the Court to
open an investigation. An alternative route set out in the Statute that could
further expedite matters would be for an ICC State Party to refer the situation
to my Office, which would allow us to actively and immediately proceed with the
Office's independent and objective investigations.
I will also be asking for the support of all States Parties
and the international community as a whole as my Office sets about its
investigations. I will be calling for additional budgetary support, for
voluntary contributions to support all our situations, and for the loan of
gratis personnel. The importance and urgency of our mission is too serious to
be held hostage to lack of means.
I will continue to closely follow developments on the ground
in Ukraine, and again call for restraint and strict adherence to the applicable
rules of international humanitarian law.
If anyone has information relevant to the Situation, this
can be submitted to my Office via: otp.informationdesk@icc-cpi.int.
For further details on "preliminary
examinations" and "situations and cases" before the Court,
click here,
and here.
Vladimir Putin is guilty of committing war crimes following his use of indiscriminate cluster bombs, Boris Johnson has told MPs.
It is the first time that the Government has directly accused the Russian President of being guilty of war crimes since he launched his invasion of Ukraine.
The Prime Minister was responding to a question in the Commons when he was asked whether Putin was a war criminal and should face trial in the Hague.
SNP leader Ian Blackford stated that civilians were being “murdered in cold blood” by Russian troops, and he called for the UK to support prosecuting Mr Putin for the “crime of aggression” by a state.
Mr Blackford said: “With every passing hour the world is witnessing the horrors of Putin’s war in Ukraine… these are war crimes happening in Europe right now. Vladimir Putin is a war criminal and one day soon Putin must face justice in The Hague.
“To prosecute Putin and his regime the full range of war crime charges need to be used including the crime of aggression by a state, but the UK’s always refused to sign up to the prosecution of this crime in international law.”
He asked whether Mr Johnson would look to change the War Crimes Act and push for the Russian leader to be tried for war crimes.
The Prime Minister replied: “What we have seen already from Vladimir Putin’s regime in the use of the munitions that they have been dropping on civilians in my view fully qualifies as a war crime.”
He added that the International Criminal Court prosecutor was already looking into whether Mr Putin was guilty of committing war crimes.
Western officials had previously warned that Mr Putin would turn to more lethal weaponry, such as the use of thermobaric rockets, also known as “vacuum bombs”, which can collapse the lungs of people near the blast.
Mr Johnson’s comments go further than those made by his deputy Dominic Raab on Tuesday, who said Mr Putin and his commanders must be held accountable for any war crimes during Moscow’s siege on Ukraine.
He told Sky News: “Those that engage in war crimes will be held to account.”
He said it must be clear to “both to Putin but also to commanders in Moscow and on the ground in Ukraine that they will be held accountable for any violations of the laws of war”.hey will be held accountable for any
Putin is a war criminal and should be treated as such
Throughout his long political career, the Russian president has been accused of countless atrocities.
Consultant at the Wayamo Foundation and a Fellow at the Munk School of Global Affairs, University of Toronto.
Published On 26 Feb 202226 Feb 2022
Russian President Vladimir Putin announced a "military operation" against Ukraine on February 24 [Handout via AFP]
On February 24, during a United Nations Security Council meeting, Sergiy Kyslytsya, Ukraine’s ambassador to the UN was informed that Russia’s invasion of his country had begun. Moments later, Kyslytsya turned to his Russian counterpart Vassily Nebenzia and told him: “There is no purgatory for war criminals. They go straight to hell.”
There is little doubt that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is a violation of international law and the UN Charter. It is also a crime. It should be called as such, not only by human rights and justice advocates, but by states.
end of list
In recent days, many state representatives, media, and scholars have rightly gone to great lengths to stress the abhorrent behaviour of Russian President Vladimir Putin. But it is almost as if what Putin is doing now is particularly egregious. This invasion is the Russian president’s calling card and war crimes are his signature.
Everything transpiring now in Ukraine, including reports of rocket attacks on civilian buildings, is par for Putin’s course. Days ago, international law scholars Frédéric Mégret and Kevin Jon Heller predicted that Putin would commit the crime of aggression by invading Ukraine. No one should be surprised if the situation gets worse. Putin’s personal biography is littered with the embrace of atrocity crimes and human rights violations.
Putin came to fame and eventually to power on the back of Russia’s 1999-2000 war in Chechnya. In annihilating the breakaway region’s separatist movement, the Russian government deployed horrific levels of violence. Human Rights Watch has documented legions of atrocities, including allegations that Russian forces “indiscriminately and disproportionately bombed and shelled civilian objects” and “ignored their Geneva convention obligations to focus their attacks on combatants”. The West responded meekly to allegations of war crimes. Rather than being condemned, Putin was largely hailed as a leader who promised Russians a better life and the West – better relations, when he replaced Boris Yeltsin as Russian president. That was not to be the case.
In 2008, Putin turned his attention to Georgia and ordered Russian troops – whom he called “peacekeepers” – to invade the Georgian provinces of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. They were not there to keep the peace. While Moscow invoked humanitarian language in arguing that it had a “responsibility to protect” its citizens in both territories, Russian forces indiscriminately attacked civilian targets – a war crime.
In 2014, Putin invaded Ukraine, leading to the illegal occupation and annexation of Crimea while also igniting a conflict in Luhansk and Donetsk that has cost an estimated 14,000 lives. During the violence, Russian-backed militants bombed Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 over Ukraine, killing all 298 people onboard. Attacks by Russian forces against civilians were commonplace and allegations of murder and torture were reported in detention facilities – referred to as “Europe’s last concentration camps” – run by pro-Russian separatists.
These are just a tiny cross-section of Putin’s crimes that have been documented by human rights and investigation bodies.
The alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by Putin’s forces also galvanised the International Criminal Court (ICC), which opened an investigation into atrocities in Georgia in 2016 and completed an examination into those committed in Ukraine in 2020, concluding that there were reasonable grounds to believe that war crimes and crimes against humanity had been committed.
And then there’s Syria. For a decade, Putin has propped up Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad despite evidence of atrocities that war crimes investigators believe is the “strongest since the Nuremberg trials”.
Russian air forces have bombed hospitals and attacked civil defence forces working to rescue survivors in the wake of bombing raids. A 2020 report by the Commission of Inquiry on Syria, set up by the UN Human Rights Council, found that Russia had bombed civilian areas in violation of the Geneva Conventions. As Kenneth Ward of the Arms Control Association has observed, Russia was also an enabler of chemical weapons attacks in Syria. Moscow protected Syria from any judicial scrutiny over its atrocities committed with and on behalf of Assad, by vetoing a referral of Syria to the ICC in 2014.
As if involvement in widespread and systematic international crimes was not enough, Putin has also been accused of ordering the poisonings of Russian dissidents in the UK and the imprisonment of pro-democracy and human rights advocates. He has also been linked to corruption on a scale that amounts to a human rights violation.
None of this is the fault of Russia. Putin is not Russia and Russia is not Putin. In the past few days, thousands of demonstrators across Russia have taken to the streets to protest the invasion of Ukraine, while “No to War” graffiti has popped up in numerous Russian cities. It is Putin – and his coterie of sycophants and enablers – who must be held to account.
Addressing the Russian president’s actions now is not just about the attacks on Donetsk, Luhansk or the outskirts of Kyiv. It is also about the atrocities he has committed with impunity in Georgia, Crimea, Syria, Chechnya and elsewhere. It is about the atrocities that he has perpetrated and that too many states have turned a blind eye to in the false hope that he could be contained and reasoned with.
As armoured columns drove into Ukraine, Canadian Ambassador to the UN Bob Rae called Putin “a war criminal”. It may be that Putin never faces justice at an international tribunal like the ICC. But the international community should organise the collection and preservation of evidence of his atrocities as they happen, in real-time before the eyes of the world. Maybe one day that evidence can be used to prosecute Putin and his regime. Above all, states should treat Putin for what he is and what he has done: a criminal for whom the laws of war and the norms of humanity mean nothing at all.
violations of the laws of war”. they will be held accountable for any violations of the laws of war”.
