URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Even Greener Pastures
  HTML https://evengreener.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: General Discussion
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 18814--------------------------------------------------
       Can a country prosecute people who committed war crimes elsewher
       e? What do you think about that?
       By: Aliph Date: August 2, 2019, 4:27 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Sorry if my juridical vocabulary isn’t correct. What do you
       think about countries (like Germany) who decided to open a case
       against a person who is suspected to have committed a crime
       OUTSIDE the territory of the country?
       They just opened a case against a former higher official of the
       Syrian army living in Germany.
  HTML https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2019/07/can-germany-convict-syrian-war-criminals/595054/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=atlantic-daily-newsletter&utm_content=20190801&silverid-ref=Mzc2NzM4MzAyOTA5S0
       I think some Europeans living in Germany and coming from
       ex-Yugoslavia must tremble at the idea.
       Some years ago (1998j  a Spanish judge, Baltasar Garzón, had
       made a similar move against the former dictator of Chili Augusti
       Pinochet accusing him of having killed Spanish citizens.
       #Post#: 18815--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Can a country prosecute people who committed war crimes else
       where? What do you think about that?
       By: SHL Date: August 2, 2019, 6:39 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=Sofia link=topic=1293.msg18814#msg18814
       date=1564738049]
       Sorry if my juridical vocabulary isn’t correct. What do you
       think about countries (like Germany) who decided to open a case
       against a person who is suspected to have committed a crime
       OUTSIDE the territory of the country?
       They just opened a case against a former higher official of the
       Syrian army living in Germany.
  HTML https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2019/07/can-germany-convict-syrian-war-criminals/595054/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=atlantic-daily-newsletter&utm_content=20190801&silverid-ref=Mzc2NzM4MzAyOTA5S0
       I think some Europeans living in Germany and coming from
       ex-Yugoslavia must tremble at the idea.
       Some years ago (1998j  a Spanish judge, Baltasar Garzón, had
       made a similar move against the former dictator of Chili Augusti
       Pinochet accusing him of having killed Spanish citizens.
       [/quote]
       Wow, Sofia, that’s a tough question involving international law.
       I took a course in law school, International Law, (I happened to
       get the highest grade in the class-sorry if I sound like I’m
       bragging), but that was back in the late 80s.
       It’s very country-specific. To my knowledge there are no
       international treaties on this yet (it's more likely in the EU).
       The US has what is/called „The Foreign Sovereign Immunities
       Act.“ The traditional rule worldwide was NO. That’s the baseline
       standard. No jurisdiction is the defense.
       But, the US said some crimes were so bad that there should be an
       exception to this.
       There was a military coup in Argentina in the 70s (you remember
       the Generals who ran the country and decided to invade what they
       said was their territory, the Falkland Islands, but the islands
       were and still are a British territory?) The British got quite
       upset about the whole thing and set troupes in to retake the
       Islands (which they did) and drive out the Argentinians.
       (There‘s really nothing on the Falklands but sheep farms). The
       Argentine generals only did this because their dictatorial rule
       was becoming unpopular in Argentina.
       A few years earlier the Argentinians had persecuted some
       minority groups in Tukaman, a province. They imprisoned and
       tortured a well-to-to furniture manufacturer. But the guy
       escaped or was released and he got political asylum in the US.
       While in the US he sued the Government of Argentina over the
       torture saying it was an international war crime and he US had
       jurisdiction under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (it‘s
       complicated).
       When the Argentine Embassy was sued in Washington, they just
       ignored the lawsuit, like it was nothing. But a Federal Judge in
       Los Angeles enter a Default Judgment in the case and awarded the
       guy several hundreds of millions of dollars.
       The Argentinians continued to ignore the situation thinking they
       were immune from a lawsuit in the US.
       But the Plaintiff‘s lawyers decided to enforce the Judgment. A
       convenient asset to levy on was Argentina‘s Airline, Aerolineas
       Argentina. As soon as one of their 747s landed at the Los
       Angeles Airport, the Los Angeles County Sheriffs office decided
       to levy on the plane to collect the default judgment. They
       locked the wheels and told the airline they were confiscating it
       to satisfy the Judgment and it was not allowed to go anywhere
       since the plane would be sold off at auction to satisfy the
       Judgment.  The flight crew, understandably enraged , got ahold
       of the Argentine Embassy, which promptly hired lawyers in
       Washington (the best law firm they could find). The plane was
       held up a week or so, and the matter was settled with Argentina
       paying out a few million to settle the case.
       So yes, international law there are certain remedies.
       #Post#: 18819--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Can a country prosecute people who committed war crimes else
       where? What do you think about that?
       By: NealC Date: August 2, 2019, 8:50 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Yes Steven but this is a criminal case, always more concerned
       with formalities like jurisdiction than civil cases.
       This is very interesting what Germany is doing, who can tell
       them to stop?  If the criminal is within their borders Germany
       can certainly enforce the law.  I applaud them for it.
       #Post#: 18827--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Can a country prosecute people who committed war crimes else
       where? What do you think about that?
       By: SHL Date: August 2, 2019, 12:07 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=NealC link=topic=1293.msg18819#msg18819
       date=1564753826]
       Yes Steven but this is a criminal case, always more concerned
       with formalities like jurisdiction than civil cases.
       This is very interesting what Germany is doing, who can tell
       them to stop?  If the criminal is within their borders Germany
       can certainly enforce the law.  I applaud them for it.
       [/quote]
       I applaud them for that too.
       The notion of international crimes against humanity being able
       to be prosecuted criminally anywhere in the world is not a new
       idea. But, it is an emerging area of law. I frankly don’t know
       how that much about it, not anymore than any layman would, but
       it‘s not something I would have any problem with. That, in
       addition to civil remedies applying too, make it all the better
       (if there’s money somewhere to be grabbed for the victims).
       #Post#: 18834--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Can a country prosecute people who committed war crimes else
       where? What do you think about that?
       By: SHL Date: August 2, 2019, 2:57 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Of course, the most common example of criminally prosecuting
       people in your own country for crimes committed outside your
       country is to be found in the US. It’s not like the German
       international war crimes concept exactly. which is unique, but
       for decades the US criminal courts have said US jurisdiction is
       no problem applied to someone doing something illegal outside
       the US if what is done has some, almost any, impact on the US.
       Drug trafficking is the classic example.
       That’s how the US grabbed Manuel Noriega years ago (I think he
       is still alive in a US prison somewhere) and the  US idea of
       grabbing Pablo Escobar in Columbia was the same concept.  But,
       he was killed and that ended that. But, Noriega was an acting
       Head of State of a sovereign nation and the US found reason to
       invade and take him into custody in his own country, haul him
       back to the US, try him, and throw him in jail forever. It
       wasn’t over human rights abuses (although I wouldn’t be
       surprised to learn he was guilty of some of those too) but drug
       trafficking.
       So, the US always can find jurisdiction to prosecute anyone in
       the world for anything it wants. All they have to say is what is
       going on has some small impact on the US, and that’s all they
       need. If the US was interested in criminally prosecuting human
       rights violators for things done outside the US, I’m positive
       the US could find some jurisdictional basis for it.
       #Post#: 18860--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Can a country prosecute people who committed war crimes else
       where? What do you think about that?
       By: SHL Date: August 3, 2019, 10:46 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=Sofia link=topic=1293.msg18814#msg18814
       date=1564738049]
       Sorry if my juridical vocabulary isn’t correct. What do you
       think about countries (like Germany) who decided to open a case
       against a person who is suspected to have committed a crime
       OUTSIDE the territory of the country?
       They just opened a case against a former higher official of the
       Syrian army living in Germany.
  HTML https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2019/07/can-germany-convict-syrian-war-criminals/595054/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=atlantic-daily-newsletter&utm_content=20190801&silverid-ref=Mzc2NzM4MzAyOTA5S0
       I think some Europeans living in Germany and coming from
       ex-Yugoslavia must tremble at the idea.
       Some years ago (1998j  a Spanish judge, Baltasar Garzón, had
       made a similar move against the former dictator of Chili Augusti
       Pinochet accusing him of having killed Spanish citizens.
       [/quote]
       I recall living in an apartment complex while going to
       University in 1979. After the fall of the Shah of Iran in that
       year, one of his top SAVAK men (the Shah‘s secret police) had
       left Iran and was living in my apartment complex under an
       assumed name. He had committed a number of crimes against
       humanity: torture, murder, you name it. The guy was a real
       monster. And, he was sought by the then new Iranian government.
       The guy was living near the University because he was living
       with his son, who was an engineering student there at the time.
       The police were looking for him, but he disappeared for awhile
       and I think moved off, but they eventually found him. I doubt
       the story is analogous to the one cited, but I believe the US
       intended just to send him back to Iran, where he would be
       summarily tried and hung. So, there wouldn’t have been much of a
       need for the US to prosecute the him itself for the crimes. But,
       the concept is a good one, and a jurisdictional foundation isn’t
       that hard too imagine. All you have to say is this fellow‘s
       crimes in Iran caused people to flee to the US, and that
       impacted the US negatively. There‘s the causal connection
       between what he did there that impacted the US.
       I‘m sure the law was a bit early in its development at the time
       for it to be applied exactly like in the article about Germany,
       but again it wouldn’t have been hard to imagine the US applying
       jurisdiction under the facts. They just didn‘t need to since,
       sending this guy back to Iran, is all they needed to do for
       justice to be done.
       My roommate and I even met the guy that summer in the swimming
       pool and talked to him. A pretty strange fellow I must say.
       *****************************************************