Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Celerity

(44,213 posts)
8. International Criminal Court arrest warrants for Vladimir Putin and Maria Lvova-Belova
Tue Apr 30, 2024, 07:59 AM
Apr 30
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court_arrest_warrants_for_Vladimir_Putin_and_Maria_Lvova-Belova

On 17 March 2023, following an investigation of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for Vladimir Putin, the President of Russia, and Maria Lvova-Belova, Russian Commissioner for Children's Rights, alleging responsibility for the war crime of unlawful deportation and transfer of children during the Russo-Ukrainian War.

The warrant against Putin is the first against the leader of a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council. The 124 member states of the ICC are obliged to detain and transfer Putin and Lvova-Belova if either sets foot on their territory.

snip

more at the link

Also, it is important to note :

https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/09/02/qa-international-criminal-court-and-united-states#2

2. Is the US a member of the ICC?

The US is not a state party to the Rome Statute. The US participated in the negotiations that led to the creation of the court.

However, in 1998 the US was one of only seven countries – along with China, Iraq, Israel, Libya, Qatar, and Yemen – that voted against the Rome Statute.

US President Bill Clinton signed the Rome Statute in 2000 but did not submit the treaty to the Senate for ratification.

In 2002, President George W. Bush effectively “unsigned” the treaty, sending a note to the United Nations secretary-general that the US no longer intended to ratify the treaty and that it did not have any obligations toward it.

However, since then, US relations with the court have been complicated but often positive (see question 7 below).

snip
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The US says it opposes th...»Reply #8