War Crimes
Leo meets with a general who opposes United States ratification of a treaty that would establish a permanent criminal court dealing with war crimes (1). Bartlet wants to send the Vice-President to Texas to urge stronger state laws against concealed firearms (2) in the wake of a shooting at a church, but Hoynes disagrees with Bartlet's focus on guns rather than on other weapons used to kill. Sam can get an education bill passed, but only if he can come up with a good reason why pennies should not be eliminated (3).
(back to top)
War crimes, International Criminal Court (last updated January 19, 2002) (back to top)
The formulations may differ, but there are some generally held principles as to how a war should be conducted. International law bans certain acts of war (such as genocide) and certain methods of conducting war (such as land mines and gas warfare), but these provisions are difficult to implement, particularly with the international community's failure to establish an international criminal court with scope beyond particular conflicts. Ethical theory, particularly the just war tradition, generally holds that war must be conducted according to principles of utility and proportionality, so that any military action is necessary to victory.
Still, the most famous war crime in United States history - the massacre of about 400 Vietnamese civilians in the village of My Thai on March 16, 1968 - resulted in relatively little legal consequence. Only four participants were ever brought to trial, and only one, Lieutenant William Calley, was convicted and then sentenced to life imprisonment. By this time, however, Calley had gained vocal support from the military; President Richard Nixon quickly freed Calley from prison and instead placed him under house arrest while awaiting consideration of his appeal. By 1974, Calley was a free man.
In the wake of the First World War, nations began to prohibit certain methods and ways of conducting warfare through treaties and conventions. In 1948, the United Nations adopted a convention defining genocide as a crime under international law that must be prevented and punished.
However, these laws, conventions and protocols lack a regular system for their enforcement and for holding individual violators responsible. War crimes have been prosecuted internationally only through specifically convened mechanisms, such as the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials after World War II, and the international criminal tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda, which were created by the United Nations Security Council on an ad hoc basis and are still in place today (for more on the prosecution of former Serbia leader Slobodan Milosevic, go here). As indicated by the United States' investigation and prosecution of William Calley, there are systems for prosecuting alleged war criminals within the United States itself, though such systems were much criticized at the time.
With the passing of the Rome Statute on the Internal Criminal Court on July 17, 1998, 160 nations decided to establish a permanent court where individuals "without any distinction based on official capacity" could be prosecuted for the following four broad crimes:
- Genocide, defined as certain acts "committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group."
- Crimes against humanity, defined as acts such as murder, enslavement, and rape when "committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack."
- War crimes, defined as "grave breaches" of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 or of international norms "as part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of such crimes. The Geneva Convention of 1949 prohibited acts such as torture and certain treatments of prisoners of war. International norms are defined to bar such acts as intentional attacks on civilians, intentional attacks made "in the knowledge that such attack will cause incidental loss of life or injury to civilians," "declaring that no quarter will be given," deliberately causing starvation of civilians, and using certain kinds of weapons.
- Aggression, which went undefined as of July 1998 and is to be defined later.
As defined by the Statute, the International Criminal Court (ICC) would have jurisdiction over individuals and crimes only in those states that have ratified the Statute via their legislatures (see Article 12 and 13) , and only if the relevant state has been found to be unwilling or unable to exercise jurisdiction itself and if the alleged crimes are of "sufficient gravity" (see Article 17). The ICC would also only have jurisdiction over crimes committed after the relevant state ratified the Statute. Specific elements of the crimes, such as the level of intent required for liability, are to be decided later (see Article 9).
The ICC Statute would provide several political and administrative checks. The ICC's prosecutor would be able to initiate investigations, but could commence cases only with approval by a pre-trial chamber of judges. Investigations or prosecutions could also be delayed for a year if the Security Council passed such a resolution.
The Statute was approved in a vote by 120 nations and opposed by seven states (including the United States, China, and Israel), with 21 abstentions. The United States said that its principal objection was over the proposed court's jurisdiction and its application to individuals. China said that there should be more checks on prosecutorial initiative. Israel opposed a provision including the transfer of populations into occupied territory as a war crime, Article 8(2)(b)(viii).
But the court is still far from a reality; the Statute does not go into force and the court not established until 60 nations ratify the Statute; as of November 2001, 139 nations had indicated their intention to ratify but only 46 nations had done so. The United States signed the Statute on December 31, 2000, thus indicating its intention to ratify but is not likely to do so, having often expressed concerns over subjecting U.S. citizens and officials to the jurisdiction of an international court.
But because jurisdiction is limited only to those cases in which a defendant had not been prosecuted by his own country's courts, or when such prosecutions were a sham (see Article 20: Ne bis in idem), the ICC can be seen mostly as a device to encourage states to prosecute their own and thus avoid ICC involvement. For example, had the ICC been in existence in 1968 and had the United States been a member, Calley probably would have been immune from ICC prosecution because he had been prosecuted and convicted in the United States. Other participants, however, would probably be subject to investigation and prosecution by the ICC, which would probably have encouraged further United States action.
Sources: The United Nations maintains a website for the International Criminal Court, available here; the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court can be found there in various languages. Adam Roberts and Richard Guelff, Documents on the Laws of War (Oxford University Press, Third Edition, 2000). Michael Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars (Basic Books, 1977). Michael Bilton and Kevin Sim, Four Hours in My Lai (Viking Penguin, 1992).
Concealed firearms (last updated January 17, 2002) (back to top)
Concealed firearm permits regulate the carrying of a handgun outside of the holder's residence or business premises. Most states require such carry permits on a mandatory ("shall issue") or discretionary ("may issue") basis. States with a mandatory system require the issuance of a permit unless a statutory reason for denial is revealed, whereas states with a discretionary system allow law enforcement to consider other factors such as an individual's history, character or intended purpose in deciding whether to issue a permit.
As of a midyear 2000 survey by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, 42 states issued concealed weapon permits on some mandatory or discretionary basis. Seven states, all in the Midwest plus New Mexico, do not issue concealed weapon permits and thus do not permit the use of concealed weapons. Vermont is the only state where one can carry a concealed weapon without a specific permit.
The number of homicides per year has gone down nationally, but handguns are still used in about half the number of homicides. Some kind of firearm, including handguns, is used in about 70 percent of homicides each year.
Sources: Bureau of Justice Statistics, Survey of State Procedures Related to Firearm Sales, Midyear 2000, available on-line here.
Penny (last updated January 17, 2002) (back to top)
The penny has fallen in value by about 90 percent since it was first introduced in 1792, and Americans' feelings about it are mixed, but it is likely to stay around for some time to come.
There is occasional discussion of eliminating the penny because it is used primarily to make change for cash transactions and usually does not circulate after initially received by the public. Eliminating the penny would reduce the time to conduct cash transactions, which some have estimated at around 2 seconds spent handling and counting pennies each time, and ensure that more cash circulates.
Whether the penny is profitable or not is disputed, though the sums involved are not so significant to decide the issue clearly one way or another. The U.S. Mint said in 1996 that it produces pennies at a profit (0.3 cent for each penny it makes at 0.7 cent cost) and its director has testified that "the penny has become a disposable product" and that "it is a good question, whether the penny continues to have a role in American currency." A General Accounting Office study in 1996 said that when other costs of handling pennies are included, the United States loses about $9 million a year from producing pennies, but that eliminating pennies still would not clearly lead to a "substantial financial benefit to the Federal Government." The GAO's 1996 study also showed that eliminating the penny would result in the loss of some jobs and revenue, but would not adversely affect zinc mining.
There have been no serious efforts to eliminate the penny outright, and studies of how other countries have changed their currency show that an immediate withdrawal could have a negative impact on the Mint if the public immediately returned pennies en masse.
Instead, a more gradual approach, which was first introduced in the House of Representatives in 1989 by Rep. James Hayes (then a Democrat from Louisiana, though he later changed parties) and again in July 2001 by Rep. Jim Kolbe (Republican from Arizona), would legalize rounding the value of cash transactions to the nearest 5 cents required, so that pennies need not be used when making a cash payment. Kolbe's bill, the Legal Tender Modernization Act, H.R. 2528, would not affect transactions where payment is not made by cash, would not affect transactions of 2 cents or less. The act would not affect pennies' use as legal tender, though proponents recognize that the proposal could begin a gradual phasing out of the penny.
Another idea suggested by the GAO in 1996 is to make the rounding of cash transactions an option for consumers and to see if demand for pennies decreased enough that the government could phase out the penny with ease.
Since 1982, the penny is a copper-plated zinc coin, composed of 97.5 percent zinc and 2.5 percent copper. Beforehand, from 1962 to 1982, it was 95 percent copper and 5 percent zinc. The change made the penny less expensive to produce and lighter in weight (2.5 grams to 3.11 grams previously).
Sources: "The Future of the 1-Cent Coin," a hearing before the House of Representatives' Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy on July 16, 1996, U.S. Government Printing Office, Serial No. 104-66, including the General Accounting Office's report, "The Future of the Penny." More information about pennies can be found via the U.S. Mint here. The Coin Coalition supports the rounding of cash transactions, which it discusses here; this proposal is opposed by Americans for Common Cents, which described itself at the House's 1996 hearing as a "comprised and endorsed by many of the nation's leading coin and numismatic organizations, in addition to companies involved in the mining of metals and the manufacturing of the penny," which is on-line here. The status of the Legal Tender Modernization Act (H.R. 2528 of the 107th Congress) can be found here.
|
|
|
Home / Calendar
The West Wing
The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
The Colbert Report
Saturday Night Live
Commander in Chief
Law & Order
*
Issues
Resources
Site FAQ
Search via Google
Ripped from the Headlines?
West Wing: Santos discusses a lawsuit about intelligent design
West Wing: Electoral map as of the 10/9 episode; Santos needs to catch up big-time
SNL: The Miers nomination
South Park: Inspired by Katrina
Boston Legal: End to assault-weapons ban
Daily Show: A 2004 study found that 21 percent of young people regularly get their campaign news from comedy shows like the Daily Show with Jon Stewart and Saturday Night Live. So, some footnotes.
NOTE: All photos are copyright their respective owners.
| |
