- WND - http://www.wnd.com -

Clinton embraces International Criminal Court

Only hours before the Dec. 31 deadline, Bill Clinton gave the United
Nations its most significant victory so far in its relentless quest for
global governance: the

International Criminal
Clinton ordered David Scheffer, ambassador-at-large for war crimes issues, to sign the 1998 Rome Statute, just before the deadline at midnight.

To be a world government, the United Nations needs three powers: 1) the ability to make law; 2) the ability to enforce its laws; and 3) the power to levy taxes necessary to fund its operations.

The U.S. endorsement of the ICC means that the United States accepts the principle of centralized, global law enforcement, as superior to the principles of law enforcement contained in the U.S. Constitution. Clinton said he signed the document to “Reaffirm our strong support for international accountability.”

The new international statute creates an Assembly of States Parties consisting of one representative from each nation that ratifies the statute. The statute goes into effect 60 days after it is ratified by the 60th nation. The ASP will elect 18 judges who will serve nine-year terms. The judges will be divided into three chambers: 1) a Pre-trial Chamber, consisting of “not less than six judges”; 2) a Trial Chamber, of not less than six judges; and 3) an Appeals Chamber, consisting of four judges and the presidency.

The presidency consists of a president and two vice presidents elected by the judges, who exercise the administrative authority of the court. The function of the Pre-trial Chamber may be carried out by a panel of three judges assigned to a particular case, or by any one of the three. Pre-trial functions include ruling on jurisdictional matters, issuing warrants or subpoenas, determining issues of jurisdiction and admissibility, and the like. The Trial judges hear, and decide the cases brought before them — without assistance from a jury.

The new statute also creates an Office of the Prosecutor who is elected by the ASP for a nine-year term. The prosecutor, a deputy and their staff, are responsible for investigating and bringing to “justice” any person accused of an international crime: “the crime of genocide; crimes against humanity; war crimes; and the crime of aggression.”

The ASP, in which the U.S. will have only one vote, and then only if the U.S. ratifies this treaty, will define what actions constitute “crimes against humanity … and the crime of aggression.” At any time it chooses, this body can expand its jurisdiction to include “environmental crimes,” or to define violations of human rights and environmental treaties to be “crimes against humanity.” The Office of the Prosecutor may “investigate” any crime within any nation — whether or not the nation is a party to the treaty — without assistance or interference from the government of that nation.

A single appointed judge from the Pre-trial Chamber can authorize such an investigation.

A victim brought before a single appointed judge in the Trial Chamber may be tried and convicted without having to be confronted by his accuser, or seeing the evidence against him, or being tried by a jury and with no guarantee against self-incrimination. Similarly, the appeals process is essentially an administrative review, with no protections for the accused. Clinton’s endorsement of this treaty may be the most egregious act of his entire tenure.

Simultaneous with the evolution of this ICC, the United Nations is working to establish a standing army to enforce the court’s decisions. The U.N. army is being promoted as a rapid-deployment “peacekeeping” force, to be used in response to, or as a preventive measure to avoid aggression. Once in place, under the command of the U.N. secretary-general, the army will march to the drumbeat of the U.N.

To fully transform global governance to world government, the U.N. must have some form of the

Tobin Tax
to supply the money required to fund its operations, and it must rid itself of the troublesome veto power exercised by the permanent members of the Security Council. Both of these objectives are being aggressively pursued — supported by some members of the U.S. Congress.

Because each of these U.N. initiatives is promoted by a different constituency, proponents either fail to see, or choose to ignore, the fact that each is an orchestrated part of the larger objective — to transform global governance into world government. The plan was published in the 1995 report of the Commission on Global Governance,

“Our Global Neighborhood.”
Since then, we have seen the plan unfold with amazing speed. The president’s endorsement of the ICC is, without a doubt, a most significant victory for the proponents of world government.

Whether or not the new crowd in Washington will have the inclination, or the political will, to reverse this trend toward world government, is a question that only time will answer. It is unlikely to do so, however, unless the American people demand it. Without a loud, persistent outcry from the American people, world government will be Clinton’s legacy.