Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Kosovo -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: George Papadopoulos who wrote (11025)	6/2/1999 3:17:00 PM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 17770

From CNN Digest. The World Court tossed out the Yugoslav suit against the US on jurisdictional grounds. The US "had opted out of a clause in the Genocide Convention that allowed any party to request a hearing in the World Court over disputes arising from the international agreement." So basically we said we claim to believe in the law against genocide but won't allow the world court to enforce it. So are we committing genocide? The world doesn't and won't know since we refuse to submit that issue to a competent court. (Question: if we were satisfied that we were obeying the law, why not allow the court to say so? Why refuse the court jurisdiction if we believe we are in the right? We could have allowed the Court to hear the dispute without invoking our objection to jurisdiction. We chose not to do so. What are we afraid of except that the Court will indeed rule that we have committed genocide?) Indeed, the World Court, even while refusing to order an immediate halt to the bombing (which would have been meaningless without the US in the suit) did say it was "profoundly concerned" about the legality of Nato actions, and that "such use raises very serious issues of international law." This will grind through the court now for years, but in the end Yugoslavia may very well prevail. Excerpts from the article: Meanwhile, in The Hague, the U.N. World Court refused a Yugoslav request to halt the bombing, but said it was "concerned" about the legality of NATO's campaign. "The court is profoundly concerned about the use of force in Yugoslavia. Under the present circumstances, such use raises very serious issues of international law," said presiding Judge Christopher Weeramantry. Yugoslavia had sued 10 nations in the World Court over NATO's bombing campaign, charging them with genocide. But the court tossed out the complaint against the United States and Spain Wednesday, saying it could not "exercise jurisdiction" in the case involving NATO airstrikes. Weeramantry said both the United States and Spain had opted out of a clause in the Genocide Convention that allowed any party to request a hearing in the World Court over disputes arising from the international agreement. Full cite: cnn.com