[ad_1]
A request has been made to the International Criminal Court (ICC) to hold a hearing on the murder and torture of Rohingya in Rakhine State, Myanmar, in a country other than The Hague in the Netherlands, especially in Bangladesh. Generally, all activities of the International Criminal Court or ICC take place in The Hague, the Netherlands. But this is the first time such a request has been made.
This time, the court has been asked to move to another country to facilitate the hearing of the victims. This appeal to the ICC came at a time when two Myanmar soldiers reportedly admitted to having participated directly in killings and rapes against Rohingya and reportedly arrived in The Hague.
International human rights lawyers say the two incidents are “very important” in the ongoing investigation into Myanmar’s accusations of crimes against humanity.
The Hague court, which is prepared to hear accusations of Myanmar’s persecution of the Rohingya, filed a petition last month requesting a stay in another country.
The request was submitted by lawyers for three ‘Victim Support Groups’ working for the Rohingya. They have requested a hearing in a country close to the persecuted Rohingya.
Although the country was not mentioned in the petition, the ICC statement on the progress of the petition described the country as “probably Bangladesh.”
In response to the request, the ICC’s “investigation chamber” number three ordered the court’s registration department to study the possibility of transferring the court proceedings from The Hague to another country, such as Bangladesh. You have been asked to verify this possibility and submit a report before September 21.
Why the initiative to set up a court in another country?
Ahmed Ziauddin, an international human rights lawyer, said the decision to establish a court in another country to hear the International Criminal Court was rare. Since thousands of tortured Rohingya refugees are in Bangladesh, it will be easier for them to testify at the hearing if it is in Bangladesh.
The petitioner’s lawyers also presented the same argument.
Shannon Raj Singh, an international human rights lawyer, wrote in a blog post: “If you fly like a bird, the distance from The Hague to Cox’s Bazar is approximately 6,000 kilometers.
He added on the blog that according to ICC rules, there is an opportunity for the court to operate in any country other than the host country (the Netherlands). Citing a clause in the Rome Statute, she said the International Court of Justice could sit elsewhere for a full or partial hearing of a case as needed.
Big boost for Myanmar
The two incidents, which came to light this week, have strongly encouraged those demanding that justice be done for crimes committed against the Rohingya. According to them, this could put Myanmar under increased pressure on the International Criminal Court (ICC) on the Rohingya genocide issue.
The New York Times and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation have published a detailed account of the confessions of two exiled Myanmar soldiers, but human rights lawyers pay little attention to them.
Ahmed Ziauddin, an international human rights lawyer working in Brussels, said that video testimony or confessional comments made by the two soldiers in the New York Times or other media reports can be important from a public point of view. Due to the charges that have been leveled against the Myanmar military for so long, two members of the group have confessed to the crime.
He said the International Criminal Court has yet to make a formal announcement about the two soldiers. The prosecution did not say whether the two soldiers were detained. If this news is true, then the incident of these two soldiers may play an important role in the investigation of the International Criminal Court. As a result, Myanmar is in danger. This is very good news on the one hand.
But is the video testimony of the New York Times report worth it?
Ahmed Ziauddin says that the testimony of the International Criminal Court or the ICC is worthless.
“The first reason is that the ICC itself is still investigating the allegations against Myanmar. That investigation is still ongoing. During the investigation, the ICC may obtain various information from various sources. The New York Times report cites details of the two. The investigators will only consider this information as additional information, there is nothing else to do.
“Because if someone wants to confess to a crime, they have to follow the rules and regulations of the ICC. And only an ICC prosecutor or investigating officer can do so. Confess to another person, be it to a rebel group or to any other authority.” . However, I don’t think they are of more value than the ongoing ICC investigation. “
What happens if two soldiers testify the same thing before the ICC?
Ahmed Ziauddin said that if these two soldiers gave the same testimony to court officials, it would be worth a lot. However, if they make a confessional statement to the ICC investigating officers, they will not only have to do so, but they will also have to provide evidence. Then it will play an important role and the judges of the ICC will consider all this.
These soldiers claim to be confessing their crimes themselves, so what will happen to them?
Ahmed Ziauddin said investigating officers would decide whether the soldiers would be charged or declared witnesses. In this case, it will be up to the investigating agents to consider the truth or do justice.
However, he said, these two soldiers appear to be far inferior. Typically, those who are “foot soldiers” or front-rank soldiers are rarely charged.
“The person under ICC law is the one with the most responsibility, the person with the most criminal responsibility. That’s where the ICC process begins. The people who planned it, the people who implemented it, the people who are among them. ” “It is not that they will not be caught, it is that the ICC will decide whether they will be prosecuted or not.”
He said it would be a very important decision for the prosecution. It is up to the prosecutor to decide whether these people will be called as witnesses or accused.
Ahmed Ziauddin said there were incidents in the past when he came to the ICC or testified before ICC prosecutors. Because those who are foot soldiers are an important source of information for any prosecution or investigation.
Source: BBC Bangla.
[ad_2]
