Lawyers slam US over objections to planned International Criminal Court

WAR CRIMES: Americans accused of shielding the military and president from investigation

Leading human rights lawyers last week slated the US government for its opposition to the establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Speaking at an ABA session, the lawyers criticised the US government for taking the political decision to object to the ICC because of the possibility that US servicemen, and ultimately the president, could end up being charged for international crimes.US lawyer Christopher Hall, UK-based legal adviser to Amnesty International's secretariat, said: 'The US government's position is a scandal.' He branded the US concerns as 'pure nationalism, perhaps chauvinism or even jingoism'.Michael Posner, executive director of the US-based Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, said the US position was 'unfortunate and in some ways baffling...

It is not a principled position.'He said there has been a very set effort to carve out a US exception and accused the US of trying to 'whittle away the jurisdictional base of the court', adding: 'The US government is not keen to create international institutions which chip away at US sovereignty and ability to make decisions...

There is a desire for an absolute guarantee that American soldiers will not be brought before the court.' Mr Hall said: 'The US simply is not serious about international justice, except for its political enemies of the day.

It's not serious about investigating crimes committed by its own soldiers.

Part of its concern is the role of the CIA and other intelligence agencies.' Last week, the number of countries ratifying the Treaty of Rome establishing the ICC reached 14.

It needs 60 ratifications to go ahead.

The UK and Germany are among the states set to ratify in the next round.

Anne Mizzi