sj
pre 1 godinu
(EA, 29 March 2023 18:56)
You are clueless to the point of being comical. Under International Law, and its own statute, the ICC can ONLY rule on matters affecting the countries which are signatories to the Rome Statue. In other words, it has no jurisdiction in countries which have not signed the statute. The act of issuing an arrest warrant for Putin is ILLEGAL act under the ICC’s own rules. He is sought on war crimes because Russia removed children from a war zone. Under the UN charter it is incumbent on countries to remove children from war zones to safe areas, so I hope you see the conundrum here.
Plus, Russia is not a signatory to the Rome Statute. The US is not a member of the ICC and under the American Service-Members' Protection Ac it authorises the President to order US military action, such as an invasion of the Hague, aka an armed incursion, to release any US/allied personnel who is being detained or imprisoned by the ICC.
Since that warrant for Putin was issued, it has been disclosed that the judge that issued that warrant that person’s bank account has improved enormously his bank.
It was a set up by the British at the behest of the US, like the UNSC over Srebrenica, to somehow force the Chinese President Xi not to go to Moscow.
All that has been done here is the ICC has shown its another organisation run by the US and its standing has been greatly diminished.
7 Komentari
Sortiraj po: