International criminal court: Tyranny by the minority

Published 16 years ago -  - 16y ago 39

Dozens of writers, including this one, have written before about the seductive nature and inherent dangers of an International Criminal Court. Not the least of which is a total disregard for our system of constitutional laws; and worse, a literal threat to America’s sovereignty, and hence our existence as an independent and free nation.

What is left to reveal about the World Court is the “progress” that has been made in making it a reality, and to which America has been, and still is, strongly opposed.

It appears impossible for some otherwise astute observers to project their thoughts far enough forward to envision what an International Criminal Court would mean to American jurisprudence; never mind that it automatically negates the very foundation of constitutional protection under the law that our founding fathers were so intent on giving us.

In touting the “benefits” to the world of an International Criminal Court, the United Nations has squeezed it in through the side door.

Now, let’s look at it through the front door, where we can get a better view of its incredulity.

Here are some cold, facts about the International Criminal Court(ICC), courtesy of The Liberty Committee.

Fact #1: Number of countries in the world: l9l.

Fact #2: Population of the world: 6,157,400,560.

Fact #3: Number of ICC countries: 66.

Fact #4: Population of ICC countries: 937,506,988.

Fact #5: Conclusion: Less then 35% of the world, with only 16% of the world’s population, created the International Criminal Court.

After perusing a compilation of the 66 ICC nations, it is clear that the list can realistically be broken down into three categories:

Category One, major nations of recognizable size and status–approximately 18.

Category Two, smaller, recognizable nations, but with little or no major world influence–approximately 15.

Category Three, very small nations, many of which you have never heard of, and most of which you probably can’t even pronounce–approximately 33.

The conclusion I personally reached after walking all the way in, was this: Not only would the function of an International Criminal Court be an anathema to America’s court system and a callous repudiation of a sovereign nation’s legal rights, but it would also constitute a gross imbalance of judicial influence, leading to, in America’s case, a direct assault on our Constitution, our principles, and our way of life.

We would wind up having the more primitive nations influencing, maybe even altering, a justice system that’s taken America 200 years to get the kinks out, and to reach an equitable justice that protects the individual.

We would be giving that up for a mixed bag of legal shenanigans concocted by a melting pot of countries who are still in the judicial dark ages. Some trade-off.

If you are willing to take your God-given rights and leave them to the legal mercies of Mongolia, Andorra, Slovakia, Tajikistan, Trinidad, Senegal, and the rest of the United Nations ICC signers, be my guest.

As for me, I prefer American justice. Guilty or not.

39 recommended
comments icon 0 comments
0 notes
bookmark icon

Write a comment...

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *