Bush, Cheney War Crimes Convictions: Lead Prosecutor Explains Ramifications

The legal ramifications of the recent convictions in Malaysia of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, for war crimes, are explained by Professor Francis Boyle of Illinois State University School of Law, the lead prosecutor on the case.

Professor Boyle was instrumental in indicting Slobodan Milosovic for war crimes and has the perspective of experience in these matters. He gives us a good idea of the likely course of events following this prosecution, discusses the sorts of obligations various states in the world have with regard to the prosecutions, and says that the International Criminal Court at The Hague is now studying documents filed by Professor Boyle and others which may lead to the indictment of Bush and others in respect of the practice of "extraordinary rendition" carried on during the years of the Bush administration.

The International Criminal Court has never examined any allegations with regard to war crimes alleged to have been committed by the Bush administration, up until the recent filings by Professor Boyle, always citing non-jurisdiction.

Professor Boyle was instrumental in getting the International Criminal Court to consider,for the first time, examining criminal charges against Bush, despite the fact that the United States is not a signatory to the Rome Statute of the ICC. Despite American non-participation in the Rome Statute, and despite the fact that the jurisdiction of the court is not universal, Professor Boyle made use of provisions of the statute that provide for prosecution of crimes committed within the boundaries of signatory states.

en.wikipedia.org...

During the negotiations that led to the Rome Statute, a large number of states argued that the Court should be allowed to exercise universal jurisdiction. However, this proposal was defeated due in large part to opposition from the United States.[46] A compromise was reached, allowing the Court to exercise jurisdiction only under the following limited circumstances:

where the person accused of committing a crime is a national of a state party (or where the person's state has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court);
where the alleged crime was committed on the territory of a state party (or where the state on whose territory the crime was committed has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court); or
where a situation is referred to the Court by the UN Security Council.[20]

Were an American official to render a prisoner to a signatory state for torture, the ICC could examine allegations with a view to indictment. That is what is happening now with regard to Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft and their legal advisors.

Here is Professor Boyle's interview on The Real News:

im sorry but this thread is just ridiculous. Bush and Cheney are going to be convicted of war crimes.....haha

Bush/Cheney etc etc ARE THE ESTABLISHMENT

It's THEIR ESTABLISHMENT

THEY MADE IT

Who are U??

Originally posted by Elsha
im sorry but this thread is just ridiculous. Bush and Cheney are going to be convicted of war crimes.....haha

I agree. Ha, ha.

Bush/Cheney etc etc ARE THE ESTABLISHMENT

It's THEIR ESTABLISHMENT

THEY MADE IT

Who are U??

I'm just a nobody, but you know, I just don't think it is a social registry thing. I used to know a Serbian guy who used to tell me they'd never get Milosovic either. He died in jail. Never is a long time.

I keep hearing about this Malaysian garbage. I keep seeing people try to make it out as a big deal. It is a THOROUGHLY small deal. It means nothing, other than Bush and Cheney probably shouldnt vacation there.

Nothing can, or will, come of this.

Professor Boyle explains things very well. The Malaysian convictions don't sound very impressive but this is like the edge of the fly paper getting caught on someone. Life is not going to be so simple from here on in. If the ICC brings down an indictment, then Bush and the others are in deep doo doo.

Apparently in Malaysia, convictions were obtained for the same reason they were obtained in the cases against John Gotti. Basically the defendants self incriminated. They couldn't keep their mouths shut.

reply to post by captaintyinknots


please...kissinger has been wanted for like decades.........

Milosovic was a small time thug they used and then got rid of like Saddam etc etc.

Bush etc etc they run this show.

Put it this way....u put bush in prison...u know what he could do to the ESTABLISHMENT? Its ridiculous. They put this crap in the media so you say "see maybe they will get him, where all the same after all"........

No we are not.......your arrestable.....G.W. Bush is NOT ARRESTABLE

reply to post by ipsedixit


If I had my way, Milosevic would be have been raped and tortured in prison and I'm an American. He was a scummy bastard that inflicted suffering upon people who didn't deserve it.

While Bush and Cheney may never be subjected to that, karma is coming for both.

reply to post by ipsedixit


All i have to say is if the HAGUE dont say they commited war crimes its Bunk. Does anyone even really listen to malaysia? Its just a way for some in power there to get more power for themselves. Its a show and dance. And good luck with malaysia enforcing that HAHAHA.

Originally posted by yuppa
reply to post by ipsedixit

 

All i have to say is if the HAGUE dont say they commited war crimes its Bunk.

I think you are overstating it. Professor Boyle and the others involved in this tribunal aren't fooling around. They are not lightweights. Boyle was one of the people who got Milosevic. He says in the interview that they kept Bush out of Switzerland recently by attempting to get him arrested there. They tried to get him indicted twice in Canada. These people are relentless and are not going to stop until allegations of criminal offenses during the Bush administration are adjudicated.

But I know what you mean. The ICC is the big league court for these sorts of offenses and numerous countries, some 60 or so, are legally bound by its decisions. The entailments of the Malaysian court are discussed by Professor Boyle, but one important result that could flow from the Malaysian conviction is that the court in The Hague will take the Malaysian decision into consideration in their deliberations.

The Malaysian decision is not inconsequential.

Originally posted by Elsha
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

Put it this way....u put bush in prison...u know what he could do to the ESTABLISHMENT? Its ridiculous. They put this crap in the media so you say "see maybe they will get him, where all the same after all"........

No we are not.......your arrestable.....G.W. Bush is NOT ARRESTABLE

The effect of the convictions and of attempts to arrest or extradite Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft etc., is that it will ruin their rap. Professor Boyle said that even people in the Obama administration may be found to be "accessories after the fact" of the crimes of the Bush administration if they do not cooperate with extradition requests, etc.

The bottom line is that you can't wander around the world making pronouncements about the rule of law and upholding the law and restoring order if you refuse to comply with the law and fail to sign treaties that would compel you to.

Eventually, American administrations are going to have to drop the pretense and just stand up and say, "There is no more use pretending we're not, because we are the new Nazis. The law is for others. We are above the law. Catch us if you can."

reply to post by ipsedixit


Isn't Paraguay the planned "safe haven" of the Bush family or did they drop that due to the possibility of having to stand trial?

reply to post by The Sword

That is correct. Like many fugitives, George W. Bush, currently a non-fugitive, has acquired some 99,000 acres of land in Paraguay. It is safely south of the equator, for nuclear fallout purposes, and not far off the northern lattitude of Walker, Texas.

It is famous for being friendly to Nazis on the run.

reply to post by ipsedixit


Has the prosecutor mentioned even considered bringing charges against the Parguayian government for allowing such an arrangement to take place?

If I'm correct, they would be harboring fugitives from justice if the Bushes indeed dropped by for a visit.

reply to post by The Sword

Paraguay has fallen between the cracks I'm afraid. They harbored the Nazis before the treaty came into effect and the Bushes are not yet fugitives.

reply to post by ipsedixit


They're all criminals in my eyes and in the eyes of many others.

There is no need for a court to determine that.

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by ipsedixit

 

They're all criminals in my eyes and in the eyes of many others.

There is no need for a court to determine that.

On an emotional level, I can see your point but when it gets to the bottom line, the difference between us and the Bush administration, is that we believe in the rule of law and that those who commit infractions of the criminal law whether state, national, or international should be held accountable.

reply to post by ipsedixit


When Malaysia stops arresting political opponents and there police stop torturing people to get confessions maybe some one would take them seriously.There notoriously anti Western government because there idea of dealing with terrorists is to appease them. This is nothing more then politics so they can show they stand up against the west in hopes that the radical elements in islam will ignore them.Means nothing they are pro Taliban in fact had several rallies there supporting them.So to put it simply means nothing to the international community.

reply to post by ipsedixit


U dont think so huh? Well Kissinger has been wanted for crimes etc for a long long time. Yet we are living in the processes of Kissinger's New World Order.

Sorry folks...your living in their world. Yes karma will come back and they will pay for what they have done....just not on this world and not in this life...

Originally posted by The Sword
reply to post by ipsedixit

 

They're all criminals in my eyes and in the eyes of many others.

There is no need for a court to determine that.

Really? How are they criminals again? Please cite your resources.

This should be interesting.

Originally posted by dragonridr
reply to post by ipsedixit

 

When Malaysia stops arresting political opponents and there police stop torturing people to get confessions maybe some one would take them seriously.

You might have missed this point, but in the interview, Professor Boyle said that the proceedings of the trial of Bush, Cheney and others was an embarassment to the Malaysian government. The Malaysians want to be friends with the US government. The trial wasn't sponsored by the Malaysian government and they had nothing to do with it.

There notoriously anti Western government because there idea of dealing with terrorists is to appease them.

Not according to Boyle. They might make public pronouncements of that sort.

This is nothing more then politics so they can show they stand up against the west in hopes that the radical elements in islam will ignore them.Means nothing they are pro Taliban in fact had several rallies there supporting them.So to put it simply means nothing to the international community.

That's what I am saying. They are on the same side as the US and the Taliban, but the trial is some sort of warcrimes watchdog committee. It's a non-governmental agency.