Rejection by African Union of ICC’s Qaddafi arrest warrant reveals ICC as hoax

It's Official: International Criminal Court has ZERO Mandate

Bangkok, Thailand July 2, 2011 – If an entire continent rejects an alleged international institution’s actions as illegitimate and self-serving, does said institution still get to call itself “international?” Furthermore, does it still hold any sort of mandate to continue on as self-proclaimed international arbiter? Certainly not, and for the International Criminal Court, whose “arrest warrant” for Libyan leader Moammar Qaddafi was soundly rejected by the 53-member African Union, their last shred of self-proclaimed credibility has been rendered moot.

Photo: NATO munitions strike a residential area in Tripoli.

With the UN resolution being illegitimate to begin with, with NATO members incrementally violating their own contrived resolution on a daily basis, and now with an entire continent rejecting the ICC’s “arrest warrant” for Qaddafi, the West’s adventure in Libya, and the “international order” it is upholding are beginning to show their true, tenuous, and very illegitimate colors.

The arrest warrant itself is based on ICC’s own “investigation.” The ICC said, “in the course of its investigation, due to unprecedented cooperation from different States and organisations (none of which are currently working in Libya), the Office of the Prosecutor has been able to collect extensive documentation and evidence in a short period of time, through 30 missions to 11 States, and through interviews with a large number of persons, including key insiders and eyewitnesses. ” Such a premise is so recklessly irresponsible, so baseless, and so morally bankrupt, it is easy to see why the African Union has such a difficult time accepting it.

A look over this “evidence” presented by the “Office of the Prosecutor” reveals a “cut & paste” bonanza of articles and reports taken from disingenuous organizations funded by the same corporations and foundations that contrived the ICC itself. The entire basis of the “Prosecutor’s” case is built upon reports taken from BBC, Al Jazeera, the London Guardian, New York Times, the US State Department’s Broadcasting Board of Governors-run Voice of America, the globalist-funded Human Rights Rights Watch, and the National Endowment for Democracy and Tides Foundation-funded International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), among many, many others.

The International Criminal Court itself claims to be, “an independent, permanent court that investigates and prosecutes persons accused of the most serious crimes of international concern, namely genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.” A visit to the Coalition for the International Criminal Court (CICC) site reveals just who is behind the ICC, who is actively promoting it and networking with the ICC’s various NGO partners, and the fact that all involved boast the same financial and political supporters.

The CICC claims to include, “2,500 civil society organizations in 150 different countries working in partnership to strengthen international cooperation with the ICC; ensure that the Court is fair, effective and independent; make justice both visible and universal; and advance stronger national laws that deliver justice to victims of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide.” The CICC however, also is “deeply appreciative of the generous support” provided by the European Union, the Ford Foundation, the Fortune 500-lined John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, George Soros’ Open Society Institute, and Humanity United.

Humanity United in turn boast partnerships with the the BBC World Service Trust, NED/Open Society/US State Department-funded Benetech, George Soros’ Open Society Institute, and the NED-funded Solidarity Center. These “generous supporters” are literally the same organizations that have built up the very “civil society organizations” the CICC is “working in partnership” with, and the same disingenuous organizations supplying the fake, contrived ICC with “evidence” to issue its “arrest warrants” with.

African Union executive Jean Ping called the ICC discriminatory, going only after “crimes” committed in Africa while ignoring those committed by the West in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. The AU has also condemned France for its blatant violation of the already illegitimate UNSC r.1973 by dropping weapons to Libya’s Al-Qaeda-linked rebels.

Meanwhile, US National Endowment for Democracy-funded Project on Middle East Democracy reported that in reaction to Libya’s threats to fight back against NATO aggression, U.S. State Department Spokesman Mark Toner said, “This is an individual who is obviously capable of carrying out these kinds of threats. It’s what makes him so dangerous. But we continue to carry out the NATO mission, while at the same time increasing pressure on him to step aside.” Like France air-dropping weapons to admitted terrorists, the US attempting to remove Qaddafi is a direct violation of the NATO coalition’s own contrived UN resolution. That the ICC isn’t filing cases against NATO members for their multitude of crimes, and the fact that an entire continent has rejected the ICC’s decision, settles the fact for all concerned that the contrived organization holds absolutely no legitimacy.


Articles by: Tony Cartalucci

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected]

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]