Posts Tagged ‘Guatemala’

International Criminal Court: More Developments

April 7, 2012

This past week has seen several important developments for the International Criminal Court (ICC).

Libya. The two remaining subjects of arrest warrants have been apprehended in Libya by militia groups, but have not been turned over to the ICC, and the Court and the National Transitional Council have been engaged in a dispute as to whether they should be turned over or tried in Libya, which does not have a functioning judicial system.

On April 4th an ICC Pre-Trial Chamber rejected the second request by the National Transitional Council to postpone the ICC’s surrender request for Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi pending the completion of proceedings against him in Libya.  The Chamber, therefore, stated that Libya must (i) make its decision to grant the Surrender Request; (ii) afford Mr. Gaddafi the procedure described in Article 59 of the [Rome] Statute which necessarily follows from arresting a person subject to a surrender request; and (iii) start making arrangements in preparation for the surrender of Mr. Gaddafi to the Court without further ado.”

Article 59 provides the subject of an arrest warrant has the right to a prompt hearing before the competent national judicial authority to determine that the warrant applies to the individual, his/her arrest has been in accordance with proper process and his/her rights have been respected. There is also a right for the individual to apply for interim release, which in this case seems exceedingly unlikely to be granted by any authority.

Palestine. On April 3rd the Office of the Prosecutor released a report about its preliminary examination of the Situation in Palestine. It said the ICC’s jurisdiction is not based upon the principle of universal jurisdiction. Instead, the Rome Statute requires that the U.N. Security Council or a “State” provide jurisdiction by becoming a State Party or by making an ad hoc declaration accepting the Court’s jurisdiction.

Here, the statement said the Prosecutor was not the proper person to make a determination as to whether Palestine was a “State” for purposes of the ICC. That was a decision, the statement concluded, that had to be made by “relevant bodies of the [U.N.]” or by the ICC’s Assembly of States Parties.

Guatemala. On April 2nd the U.N. received from the Government of the Republic of Guatemala its instrument of accession to the Rome Statute. The Statute will enter into force for Guatemala on 1 July 2012, bringing to 121 the total number of States Parties, 27 of which are from Latin America and the Caribbean

 

The Sanctuary Movement Case

May 22, 2011

After 19 years of practicing corporate litigation with prominent law firms in New York City and Minneapolis, I was a tabula rasa in what turned out to be important topics for me. I had no knowledge of, or interest in, international human rights law in general or refugee and asylum law in particular. Nor did I have any knowledge of, or interest in, Latin America in general or El Salvador in particular. At the same time I was struggling with the question of how to integrate my newly re-acquired Christian faith with my professional life.

In 1985 all of this started to change.

My senior partner at Faegre & Benson asked me to provide legal counsel to the firm’s client, the American Lutheran Church. The problem: how should the ALC respond to the news that the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service had sent undercover agents into worship services and Bible study meetings at Lutheran and Presbyterian churches in Arizona that were involved in the Sanctuary Movement?

As I soon discovered, that Movement was a loose association of Christian congregations that declared themselves sanctuaries or safe spaces for Salvadorans and Guatemalans fleeing their civil wars in the 1980s. The news about the “spies in the churches” was revealed by the U.S. Government in its prosecution of some of the Movement’s leaders for harboring and transporting illegal aliens, some of whom were later convicted of these charges.[1]

In the meantime, the ALC and my own church, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), decided to join together to sue the U.S. Government over the “spies in the churches.” Eventually the U.S. District Court in Phoenix agreed with the churches that the First Amendment’s “freedom of religion” clause[2] provided protection against certain government investigations.

The court said that the churches ”in the free exercise of their constitutionally protected religious activities, are protected against governmental intrusion in the absence of a good faith purpose for the subject investigation. The government is constitutionally precluded from unbridled and inappropriate covert activity which has as its purpose or objective the abridgment of the first amendment freedoms of those involved. Additionally, the participants involved in such investigations must adhere scrupulously to the scope and extent of the invitation to participate that may have been extended or offered to them.”[3]

I should add that the courtroom work in this case was done by two lawyers at the Phoenix firm of Lewis and Roca–Peter Baird[4] and Janet Napolitano.[5]

This case marked a turning point in my legal career as will be evident in subsequent posts.


[1]  One of the founders of the Sanctuary Movement was Rev. John Fife of Tucson’s Southside Presbyterian Church. He was one of those convicted in 1986 in the criminal case.  Six years later he was elected the national leader (Moderator) of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)..(Wikipedia, John Fife, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Fife.)

[2]  “Congress shall make no law . . . prohibiting the free exercise [of religion].” (U.S. Const., Amend. I.)

[3]  Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) v. U.S., 752 F. Supp. 1505, 1516 (D. Ariz. 1990), on remand from, 870 F.2d 518 (9th Cir. 1989).

[4]  Peter Baird, http://www.lrlaw.com/files/Uploads/Documents/Baird%20Bio.pdf; Phoenix veteran attorney Peter Baird dies, Phoenix Bus. J.(Aug. 31, 2009), http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2009/08/31/daily19.html.

[5]  Napolitano now, of course, is the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. (Wikipedia, Janet Napolitano, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janet_Napolitano.)


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 346 other followers