Critics of universal jurisdiction and the ICC have raised such concerns over the arbitrary basis for such action. The ICC did nothing until other countries lined up against Gaddafi. I share the concerns over the criteria used to pick out leaders or officials for such prosecutions. Once again, I hold no brief for Gaddafi. However, what is the objective standard to pick among the world’s tyrants in this case? What prevents the ICC from simply picking those leaders who are unpopular with Western countries while doing little with other tyrants?
Here the ICC is rather belatedly seeking the prosecute for decades of authoritarian rule. It did not see much of a basis to act after Libya’s sponsorship of the Pan Am terrorist attack. Now it is relying on former officials who participated in the regime’s years of abuse. Some of these officials now admit to sponsoring such attacks like the one with Pan Am — despite their earlier denials and service to the regime. It was only when Gaddafi started killing Libyans in the streets that they suddenly became humanitarians.
Source: Independent
Jonathan Turley
