How to Use the Members Only Section

SEARCH DTT

DIGEST

NEWSBYTES

by date

ANALYSES

KEY DOCUMENTS

Jiang-Yeltsin Joint Statement 

Jiang-Putin Beijing Declaration

UN International Financial Architecture

DTT INFORMATION

Discerning the Times  

  •  
    6 Heather Road
  • Bangor, ME 04401
     

    Phone

    (207) 945-9878

     

    email
    DTT@discerningtoday.org
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     

    Volume 3 Issue 7-8, July-August 2001

    World Court claims jurisdiction over US courts
    © 2001 Discerning the Times Digest and NewsBytes
    The International Court of Justice in The Hague, Netherlands
    The International Court of Justice or World Court is housed in The Hague.

    The World Court has become increasingly aggressive in faulting US courts in death penalty cases over the past few years. But, it has never claimed that the US violated its direct orders – until now. The Washington Times reported on June 28 that the International Court of Justice (ICJ or the World Court) said the State of Arizona violated a World Court injunction by executing a German national in defiance of its wishes, and insisted in its most explicit language that ICJ orders are binding on US and other national courts. "By failing to take all measures at its disposal to ensure that Walter LaGrand was not executed pending the [ICJ's] final decision ... the United States breached the obligation incumbent upon it," the judges wrote in a majority opinion. Walter LaGrand was one of two German brothers executed for fatally stabbing a bank manager during a botched robbery in 1982.

    At the request of Germany in March 1999, the Hague-based World Court by 14-1 had issued a "legally binding" provisional order a sort of injunction ordering Arizona not to execute him until it could hear Germany's case, which could have taken two years, according to the June 27 BBC. LaGrand was executed, as scheduled, the following day. The ICJ hears disputes between nations. Its decisions are considered binding and can only be appealed through the U.N. Security Council. The Court's ruling essentially reinforced that. 

    International law to supercede US law

    The case is very important in that the suddenly aggressive World Court and the soon-to-be in force International Criminal Court both claim global jurisdiction over national courts in issues dealing with international treaties and international law. In this case the World Court claimed the US violated the Vienna Convention was violated in the LaGrand case. The June 28 BBC reported that the US State Department officials agreed with the World Court – the Vienna Convention was violated by the US, but only on a technicality. "The World Court accepted the US argument that it had established a department to deal with consular issues affecting foreigners arrested under US law," according to the BBC.

    American lawyers had argued at The Hague two years ago that the trial was fair and that the LaGrands had ample time –  nearly 15 years –  to run through appeals in four different courts. Germany claimed the US did not notify Germany in time for them to receive help. But, no one knew the LaGrands were also German citizens. The two brothers immigrated to the US when they were two years old, and had no German accent.

    Europe and the UN are putting tremendous pressure on the US to do away with the death penalty. The European Union (EU) actually requires the elimination of the death penalty for membership in the EU.  Most see this as nothing more than legal maneuverings to "litigate the death penalty under the guise of a violation" of the Vienna Convention, claims State Department lawyer James Thessin. "We must not allow Germany to lead us into ... restructuring the United States criminal justice system," he said. Neither should we allow the UN to do the same thing through international treaties as they have been.  V mc