[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 18]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 27287]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                         FOR CLINTON'S LAST ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. JOHN CONYERS, JR.

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                       Friday, December 15, 2000

  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend Robert S. McNamara, 
who served as defense secretary under President John Kennedy and Lyndon 
Johnson for his editorial that was published in the December 12, 2000 
edition of the New York Times. Mr. McNamara is calling on President 
Clinton to sign a treaty, finalized in Rome in 1998, that would create 
a permanent International Criminal Court. Senator Jesse Helms has 
promised to block any attempt to ratify the pact. As Mr. McNamara 
correctly points out, Senator Helms' justification for not ratifying 
the treaty are unfounded. The tribunal of 18 world jurists would only 
have jurisdiction to charge those who commit specific crimes that 
outrage the international community as a whole, and each nation would 
retain the right to try its own nationals in a fair trial under its own 
laws. More than 25 nations have ratified the agreement, but we must 
have 60 nations to ratify before the court can begin trying cases. 
Given there is an urgent need to deter future atrocities, I urge 
President Clinton to sign the International Criminal Court agreement 
with all deliberate speed, and call on Senator Jesse Helms, in the 
spirit of justice, freedom, and humanity, not to block the agreement. 
To do so would be a travesty of justice.

                [From the New York Times, Dec. 12, 2000]

                         For Clinton's Last Act

            (By Robert S. McNamara and Benjamin B. Ferencz)

       With the stroke of a pen, President Bill Clinton has a last 
     chance to safeguard humankind from genocide, crimes against 
     humanity and the ravages of war itself. He must simply sign a 
     treaty, finalized in Rome in 1998, to create a permanent 
     International Criminal Court.
       If he signs the treaty before Dec. 31, the government does 
     not have to ratify the treaty at this time. After that date, 
     any country has to both ratify and sign the treaty to become 
     a member. This is no small consideration, since Senator Jesse 
     Helms, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, has 
     promised to block any attempt to ratify the pact.
       Why does Mr. Helms object to a permanent international 
     criminal court? He and others are worried that an unchecked 
     international court could infringe on basic American 
     constitutional rights for fair trials. For instance, they 
     want ironclad guarantees that the court would never try 
     American soldiers. Pentagon officials fear that Americans 
     might be falsely accused of crimes, thus inhibiting our 
     humanitarian military missions.
       These worries are unfounded. The tribunal of 18 world 
     jurists only have jurisdiction to charge those who commit 
     specific crimes that outrage the international community as a 
     whole.
       And most important, each nation retains the primary right 
     to try its own nationals in a fair trial under its own laws. 
     There are some crimes, like sexual slavery and forced 
     pregnancy, that the treaty covers, which are not specifically 
     enunciated in our own country's military laws and manuals. 
     Robinson O. Everett, a former chief judge of the United 
     States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, has recommended 
     incorporating these crimes into our federal laws, assuring 
     that any American military personnel charged with a crime 
     could be tried by American courts.
       Genocide is universally condemned but there is no universal 
     court competent to try all perpetrators. The Nuremberg war 
     crimes trials, inspired by the United States and affirmed by 
     the United Nations, implied that ``never again'' would crimes 
     against humanity be allowed to go unpunished.
       Today, we have special courts created by the United Nations 
     Security Council that have very limited and retroactive 
     jurisdiction. For instance, war crimes tribunals are now 
     coping with past atrocities in Yugoslavia and Rwanda. But 
     these tribunals are hardly adequate to deter international 
     crimes wherever they occur.
       The president must help deter future atrocities. At the 
     United Nations and elsewhere, he and Secretary of State 
     Madeleine Albright have repeatedly called for an 
     international court to carry forward the lessons of 
     Nuremberg. Now, he has a chance to take action. More than 100 
     nations, including all our NATO allies, have already signed. 
     Some 25 nations have ratified; others are well on the way. 
     The court cannot begin trying cases until at least 60 nations 
     have ratified.
       If President Clinton fails to sign the treaty, he will 
     weaken our credibility and moral standing in the world. We 
     will look like a bully who wants to be above the law. If he 
     signs, however, he will reaffirm America's inspiring role as 
     leader of the free world in its search for peace and justice.

     

                          ____________________