Krugeristan wrote:Great Confederacy Of Commonwealth States wrote:I don't think so. Well, in reality, the crimes they are accused of would fall into a few different categories for a few different courts, but like the Yugoslavia Tribunal, you can mix them all together into one big accusation. However, such an international body would not be able to demand the death penalty, especially since Russia is bound by the European Convention for Human Rights, which forbids the use of the death penalty. So, yeah, no, the post makes perfect sense, other than the death penalty bit.
So, what are we going to do?
What would have to happen in order for the death penalty to be allowed, especially since Syria, Gaddafi's kin, Egypt, and most of the Arab countries are demanding the accused be put to death if found guilty?
Well, if those countries somehow got to prosecute those people under their own national laws, and if they have the death penalty, they could try something like that. International courts, however, won't condemn people to death.
Krugeristan wrote:Great Confederacy Of Commonwealth States wrote:Hmmm, that won't fly. Even hypocrites can sue in a court of law. I think we'll need to show that international law cannot govern the internal affairs of nations, and that the defendants were acting in their national interest. So, for instance, prove that the wars were justified and that the US didn't even try to kill Assad or Khadaffi. Then, we can move that Obama is a head of state, protected under international law from international prosecution.
Ermergerd, Gaddafi's name. How many ways are there to spell it?!
Since all of those are transliterations of the Arabic, as many as there are languages and pronunciations.