Learning lessons: Belgium’s universal jurisdiction law under threat, Laurie King-Irani

Opinion, June 2003, Al-Jazeerah.info

Learning lessons: Belgium’s universal jurisdiction law under threat

Laurie King-Irani

The Daily Star, 6/25/03

In an unprecedented example of interference in a sovereign state’s judicial and political processes, the US government today forced the Belgian government to give in to its demands by using heavy-handed tactics. Belgium complied by agreeing to gut its progressive universal jurisdiction legislation (anti-atrocity law), which had already undergone a serious reconfiguration in Belgium’s Parliament this spring. The US feared that the law, even in a radically modified form, might lead to the prosecution of US military or governmental officials, or their possible arrest in Belgium. Numerous legal impediments to these possibilities exist. Belgium outlined all of them in an attempt to deflect US pressure, but to little avail in the face of US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s characteristically bludgeon-like techniques of persuasion.
It was unlikely that any cases brought against US officials in Belgium would have reached investigative and trial stage. Despite this and the Belgian government’s deferral of all cases brought against US officials thus far, Rumsfeld arm-twisted the Belgians by threatening to withhold massive funding for NATO operations and building projects, and even warned repeatedly that the US would move NATO out of Belgium unless the law was watered down.
Economically speaking, such a move against Brussels would be tantamount to moving the New York Stock Exchange out of Manhattan. Very few countries could have withstood such pressures, and the Belgian government has now capitulated, rendering its universal jurisdiction law barely universal and likely weakening a number of high-profile, legally sound cases, primarily a case against former Chadean dictator Hissene Habre and the landmark case against Ariel Sharon, Amos Yaron, Rafael Eitan and others, which the Belgian Supreme Court ruled last February warranted a full investigation.
Gloating over his success at forcing Belgium’s compliance with US designs and demands today, Rumsfeld condescendingly stated that: “Belgium has learned its lesson: there are consequences to its actions.”
Ironically, that very lesson is what the universal jurisdiction law aimed to impart to war criminals and rights violators throughout the world: If you violate the Geneva Conventions, the Convention for the Prevention of Torture, or the Convention for the Prevention of Genocide, know that you cannot enjoy impunity. You will not escape justice; there will be legal and judicial consequences to your actions.
Thousands of victims and survivors of human rights abuses, torture, genocide, and crimes against humanity face a darker world today, while those who tormented them and murdered their families can breathe easier now, knowing that “business as usual” will continue and their chances of being brought to book for their crimes are once again slight.
Although many commentators have attempted to depict the Belgian universal jurisdiction law as bizarre, extreme, embarrassing, or outrageous, it was nothing of the sort. In fact, the Belgian universal jurisdiction legislation of 1993, 1999 and 2003 simply formalized and codified in Belgian national law what is expected of every signatory to the Geneva Conventions to prosecute or extradite anyone guilty of the most heinous categories of crimes known to humanity.
For acts of torture, war crimes, and crimes against humanity, the jurisdiction is not simply territorial, but universal. All countries have not only the right, but also the duty, to prosecute such criminals in the interests of all humanity. Belgium simply took this principle seriously and put it into practice, framing it in laws and guiding it with policies. No politician in Belgium should be so obsequious as to express embarrassment or shame over the universal jurisdiction law. The law should instead be celebrated as a reason for national pride and presented as a lesson in courage and principles from which others can learn.
For supporters of the global campaign against impunity for war crimes and crimes against humanity, the clock has now been set back dramatically. In a world dominated by a lone superpower hostile to the concept of international humanitarian law and global justice, those committed to halting the worst abuses humanity can inflict on itself by preventing impunity confront immense tasks. First and foremost is the job of educating the public educators, journalists, and local and national decision-makers about the role and importance of international humanitarian law and international human rights law. These laws belong to all of us. They are meant to protect everyone from harm; they are not meant to protect the elite, the well-connected, and the powerful from oversight and accountability.
The intricate framework of international law, one of the noblest accomplishments of the bloody 20th century, is now under serious assault. Protecting, preserving and advancing this body of ever-evolving laws is a priority and a duty for all of us, not only for our sakes, or the sakes of those who have suffered unspeakable wounds in the past, but more so for the coming generations, who stand to lose much if the current climate of disregard and disrespect for international justice is allowed to flourish and further erode the emerging global framework of accountability.
The International Campaign for Justice for the Victims of Sabra and Shatila has endeavored to play its humble part in this education effort. We are moved by the concern and letters of support from people throughout the world, thankful for the hard work of the lawyers, Luc Walleyn, Michael Verhaeghe, and Chibli Mallat, amazed at the courage of the survivors of the massacre, proud of our efforts, and grateful that our case has progressed as far as it has in Belgium’s judicial system. A Belgian Supreme Court ruling found in favor of the Sabra and Shatila plaintiffs and, despite recent unprecedented and unprincipled US pressures, our case may yet go forward in the Belgian courts. We have not yet reached the end of the road, since the Belgian Parliament and public have yet to weigh in on Donald Rumsfeld’s draconian demands. Also, the option to pursue the case in another venue, in Europe or elsewhere, remains a possibility.
As Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch both note in their analyses of the use of the principle of universal jurisdiction in national courts, the most important ingredient for successful prosecution of war crimes and crimes against humanity in national venues is the political will to put teeth in international law. The Belgian people are to be commended for going further than any other country so far in doing just that.
Perhaps their courage, initiative, and commitment to international justice will inspire other countries to pursue a similar path.

Laurie King-Irani is a lecturer in social anthropology at the University of Victoria, Canada, and co-founder of ElectronicIraq.net. She wrote this commentary for The Daily Star

Earth, a planet hungry for peace

The Israeli apartheid (security) wall around Palestinian population centers (Ran Cohen, pmc, 5/24/03).

The Israeli apartheid (security) wall around Palestinian population centers in the West Bank (Ran Cohen, pmc, 5/24/03).