I’ve read here and there, mostly via memes, that it’s not unlikely that the ICC will want a word with Pete Hesgeth regarding possible war crimes as relates to the strikes on Venezuelan “drug” boats. The thing is, I’m pretty sure that the State Department (or whichever agency is responsible for this type of thing) isn’t just going to allow him to be extradited to The Hague. Am I correct in my thinking?
The USA is not even a signatory to the International Criminal Court. For better or worse, the ICC has no jurisdiction over any US citizen.
That’s right. the ICC has no jurisdiction over US citizens.
This was exactly why the US has not signed the treaty constituting the Court: because they don’t want their military or other activities abroad to be subject to the Court’s jurisdiction.
The “So What?” is that, post-Secretary of War posting, he can’t travel to any country that does support the ICC, because he’ll be arrested. So we at least spare ourselves the displeasure of having him in our various countries, even briefly.
It’s not much, but barring the US getting its collective head out of its collective ass, it’s all we have.
This is the important point. The U.S. will not extradite its citizens to be tried by the ICC. But many crimes can be tried under the principle of universal jurisdiction.
This is pretty hard to answer FQ re whether the US would turn him over or not. History would say never happened nor has the ICC ever even charged anyone.
In theory, Does the ICC even have jurisdiction to try to arrest Def Sec of War Crimes Hegseth? Maybe.
Two things need to be true for ICC Jurisdiction:
- Venezuela is a party to the ICC. That’s the country that matters for jurisdiction. As long as these crimes occurred inside Venezuela territory, then the ICC has jurisdiction over anyone (even non-signatories like the US) who committed them.
- Is there an Armed Conflict? The ICC tries people for war crimes. You can’t commit a war crime without an armed conflict. The ICC would need to determine that these strikes Pete ordered against cocaine amounted to armed conflict.
- There are a category of some non-armed conflict/peacetime crimes the ICC can charge, like crime of aggression or crimes against humanity that I’ve seen others argue in this situation to get around the lack of an armed conflict but you still have to deal with No. 1.
It’s possible, but in this situation you run into multiple jurisdiction issues pretty quick.
But that would be by the domestic courts of other countries, not by the ICC, as it does not have jurisdiction over US citizens.
As an international court, it only has the jurisdiction granted by the treaty and the signatories to the treaty. Since the US has not signed the treaty, the ICC does not have jurisdiction.
This is not correct. Their webpage has a list of proceedings:
Israel hasn’t signed the treaty either, and that hasn’t stopped the ICC from indicting Netanyahu.
Got it. I meant US Citizens. Investigated yes, charged no.
So the issue of whether we will or not extradite a US citizen has never happened before in the past.
Yes. From Understanding the International Criminal Court:
10. Under what conditions does the ICC exercise its jurisdiction?
When a State becomes a party to the Rome Statute, it agrees to submit itself to the jurisdiction of the ICC with respect to the crimes enumerated in the Statute. The Court may exercise its jurisdiction in situations where the alleged perpetrator is a national of a State Party or where the crime was committed in the territory of a State Party. Also, a State not party to the Statute may decide to accept the jurisdiction of the ICC. These conditions do not apply when the Security Council, acting under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, refers a situation to the Office of the Prosecutor.
Additionally, other countries may use their own courts to prosecute crimes under universal jurisdiction.
And Palestine in particular:
https://www.icc-cpi.int/palestine
On 1 January 2015, the Government of The State of Palestine lodged a declaration under article 12(3) of the Rome Statute accepting the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (“ICC”) over alleged crimes committed “in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, since June 13, 2014”. On 2 January 2015, The State of Palestine acceded to the Rome Statute by depositing its instrument of accession with the UN Secretary-General. The Rome Statute entered into force for The State of Palestine on 1 April 2015.
Sorry, this is not a hijack, just a question: is the guy’s name Hesgeth like in the OP or Hegseth as mentioned in the NYT?
I misspelled it. Sorry.
A Democratic Attorney General in four years with more guts than Garland could try him for murder.
Fixed.
Not if Trump pardons him for any crimes he committed or may have
committed or taken part in between a set range of dates.
As mentioned above, if everyone gets a pardon, then this is moot.
This is the FQ version….Without a pardon it would still be hard to charge. It has to be unlawful - duh, but Trump is using the same legal manipulation that Bush (torture) and Obama (drones) did. He has an OLC memo from the DOJ that says all this is legal. OLC from DOJ is not just a random lawyer or jag giving their two cents, it’s much more substantive. It’s effectively US law. It’s a quirk that is being exploited.
The AG could still try him - definitely. But Hegseth would say how is it illegal, you literally told me a few years ago it was legal when I asked. I relied on that. Pretty decent defense.
Obviously a lot very eye roll worthy stuff in there to debate, but that’s all the legal framework of how it plays out and why previous AG’s did not charge it even when they said they would before they were AG.
Thank god. We have enough criminals already, even if they are not specifically war criminals.
Perhaps we could offer him a nice quite vacation in South Sudan? Or Yemen? I hear it is glorious at this time of militarised conflict. Weather seems nice.
The International Criminal Court defines a war crime as a serious violation of international humanitarian law committed during armed conflict, which includes acts like willful killing, torture, and intentionally directing attacks against civilians or civilian objects. These crimes are outlined in the Rome Statute, which serves as the court’s founding treaty.
The above is a summary of the information here.
Thanks. I’m not clear why that was directed at me but I’ll assume it was in addition to my post.
In addition to the jurisdiction requirement of requiring an armed conflict to even be able to charge any war crime, if there is an armed conflict then ICC could have jurisdiction over Hegseth if the strikes are in Venezuela. Now you’ve listed out the specific kinds of acts that are considered war crimes the ICC could actually charge him with. I’ll go with attacking civilians and that cocaine is not a military necessary target.