Russia
Urges UN Probe
of NATO in
Libya, ICC
Loophole
Raised, Ban
"Misled"
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
December 22 --
Russia on
Wednesday
asked for a UN
investigation
of the killing
of civilians
in Libya by
NATO during
its
bombing
campaign
there. US
Ambassador
Susan Rice
responded that
this
was "bombast
and bogus
claims" meant
to distract
from the
situation in
Syria.
A
third
Ambassador
who spoke,
Gerard Araud
of France,
said that the
International
Criminal Court
can
investigate
and address
the alleged
killing of
civilians by
NATO.
Inner
City Press
asked
Ambassador
Rice if the
exemption from
prosecution of
nationals
of non-ICC
members in the
Security
Council
resolution
(1970)
referring the
situation in
Libya to the
ICC didn't now
mean that the
ICC cannot act
on NATO
members who
are not ICC
members: like
the
United States,
and Qatar.
Rice
said, "I'm
not going to
get into legal
questions of
jurisdiction
or lack of
jurisdiction,"
saying again
that it is a
"distraction."
Video
here from
Minute 16:55,
transcript
below.
When
Resolution
1970
was passed
-- France at
the time
pointed the
press against
fellow EU
member
Portugal as
being "soft"
of the ICC
referral,
while its
Ambassador
Araud blamed
the exemption
on
Republicans in
the US
Congress --
Inner City
Press had
asked Rice if
it might have
a bad effect.
To some, it
now has.
(c) UN Photo
Churkin
and Rice,
previously,
"bombast and
bogus claims"
not shown
Inner
City Press
on Wednesday
asked Russian
Ambassador
Vitaly
Churkin, since
he is
asking for
"UN"
investigation,
about the
statement by
UN
Secretary
General Ban
Ki-moon that
resolution
1973 was
strictly
complied with.
Churkin said
this "doesn't
reflect well
on the
United
Nations,"
adding that
Ban Ki-moon
was "misled"
by the
Secretary
General of
NATO, and Ban
"went public"
with it. Video
here, from
Minute 8:20.
So can Ban's
UN now
investigate?
Watch this
site.
From
the US Mission
transcript:
Inner
City
Press
...Ambassador
Rice, on this
question of
the ICC having
jurisdiction
to look into
this or
prosecute it,
it seems to
some that
there is a
clause, there
was a
carve-out, for
non-ICC
members not
being subject
to the court
for their
operations in
Libya. So,
since
there were
some,
including your
own, countries
in NATO that
are not
subject to the
ICC, how does
that-how does
the ICC have
jurisdiction
over that?
Ambassador
Rice:
I'm not going
to get into
the legal
question of
jurisdiction,
lack of
jurisdiction,
but let me
just say this:
the prosecutor
has
said in the
open chamber
that that is
what he's
doing. But the
point
is that this
is a
distraction
and a
diversion. And
it is a
diversion
from the fact
that this
Council's
actions and
those of NATO
and its
partners saved
tens of
thousands-if
not hundreds
of
thousands-of
Libyan lives.
That is
something we
should be
celebrating.
It is
certainly
something that
the people of
Libya are
celebrating.
And if
the Libyans
want to work
with NATO to
investigate
any concerns
they
have, we're
more than
willing to do
that. I think
it's notable
that
we've not
heard that
call from the
Libyan
government. So
let us-let
us see this
for what it
is: it is
duplicitous,
it's
redundant,
it's
superfluous
and it's a
stunt. And if
others want to
go along with
it,
they can. But
I did not hear
a majority of
the members of
the Council
indicate that
they thought
this was
necessary. And
we're
certainly
looking
forward to
hearing from
the commission
of inquiry.
, 
