UK campaign to arrest the Pope may herald quagmire for universal jurisdiction laws
You have the right to remain silent...
Well, vindication may be just around the corner. Now it emerges that the universal jurisdiction laws that have been used to effectively exclude prominent Israelis from Great Britain for fear of war crimes indictments may be used to launch a prosecution against, wait for it, the Pope.
This is not a theoretical idea. Two prominent atheist writers, Richard Dawkins (author of The God Delusion) and Christopher Hitchens, announced over the weekend that they are consulting lawyers with a view to prosecuting His Holiness when he comes to Britain in September. Charges, being considered by high profile human rights lawyer Geoffrey Robertson QC, would relate to Pope Benedict’s alleged cover up of abuses by paedophilic priests. The alleged cover up is said to amount to a crime against humanity. If, on that basis, a prosecution is launched the universal jurisdiction procedures would provide the route to do it.
Where to start? Perhaps firstly by pointing out that any such prosecution could (and probably would) be taken by Catholics around the world as a declaration of war against them by a Protestant judicial system. (The Queen is the titular head of the Anglican church and also of the English courts).
Apart from anything else, this would thus amount to an abrogation of the Peace of Westphalia — the treaties which followed the Thirty Years war (1618-1648) and which sought to bring an end to religious conflict across Europe.
Now, I have just the suspicion that before the international law crowd plunges us back into the early 17th century someone in a position of authority is going to have what alcoholics reputedly refer to as “a moment of clarity”. It’s just not going to be allowed to happen.
But here’s the nub of the matter if the principle of universal jurisdiction is indeed invoked: it’s either universal or it’s not. If you amend or abolish it for one person, you amend or abolish it for everyone. You can’t say: prosecute Tzipi Livni, but don’t prosecute the Pope.
It is also crucial to note that the notion of the Pope as being immune from prosecution due to his status as a nominal head of state is unlikely to hold up. Mark Stephens, another lawyer working on the case for the campaigners, was quoted by the Guardian as saying:
“I’m convinced we can get over the threshold of immunity… The Vatican is not recognised as a state in international law. People assume that it has existed for time immemorial but it was a construct of Mussolini, and when the Vatican first applied to become a member of the UN, the US said no. So as a sop they were given the status of permanent observers rather than full members.”
If Stephens is right, what this all means is that the universal jurisdiction laws are almost certain to be amended beyond recognition in the very near future since the mere possibility they could see the Pope hauled before a British court is something the UK authorities will swiftly move to forestall.
It is true that there are other routes for a prosecution. The lawyers are also mulling the possibility of prosecuting the Pope under purely English law by, for example, finding a victim of abuse by Catholic priests who was living in England at the time the abuse took place.
But the case will inevitably occasion a rethink of the entire system, universal jurisdiction included, under which non-UK nationals can be prosecuted in Britain for alleged crimes committed while residing in another country.
Israeli generals and former ministers will benefit from the changes like everyone else.
In a roundabout sort of way, that is very much to be welcomed. But I return to the point I opened with: ultimately this mad, hysterical mindset will reveal itself to a wider audience. That’s no reason for complacency. But, amid all the gloom, it tells us there is hope.
————-
As a postscript, check out the most recent comments by Dawkins on the Catholic church here. Breathtaking…
Tags: Israel
April 13th, 2010 at 12:41 pm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7095471.ece
Even if the crazy UK UJ loophole (that a malevolent individual can achieve an arrest on his own) IS closed because of threats to the Pope, who do you think will be blamed for weakening UJ which will be said to be “essential as part of the cause of bringing to justice those who commit crimes against humanity”….
Just read Corbyn’s EDM, signed by swathes of Lab and Lib Dem MPs
http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=40074
April 13th, 2010 at 1:13 pm
I see that: “The Vatican is not recognised as a state in international law. People assume that it has existed for time immemorial but…as a sop they were given the status of permanent observers rather than full members.”
You mean the Papal State possesses a diplomatic standing akin to the Palestine Liberation Organization?
April 13th, 2010 at 1:29 pm
I was waiting for something like this to happen. I considered it reasonably likely that someone, somewhere would harbour a grudge against other leaders/statesmen/other office holders, leaving none absolutely certain that they could travel to the UK with confidence in a happy arrival.
On a light-hearted note, perhaps the issue of the arrest of Obama might be in order? Crimes against Nobel Peace Prize, the winning thereof?
April 13th, 2010 at 3:50 pm
Barack Obama must be arrested as well.
There was a private sting operation against ACORN last year that involved employees of that organisation turning a blind eye to underage prostitution and showing a willingness to assist the “ringleaders.”
Obama described it as a relatively unimportant issue and is equally deserving of arrest.
Come to think of it, so are the majority of media people who ignored the story.
(I always knew Hitchens’ dark side would come to the fore and ruin any good he has done.)
April 13th, 2010 at 5:51 pm
The problem with Universal Juridiction is that there is no accepted Universal standard of Law, no Universal Authority and no Universal enforcing Power.
Except of course, God’s Law, God’s Authority and God’s Power. Believing Jews and Christians will agree that this requires waiting for the Messiah. Any attempt to pre-empt that process will result in disaster. The current attempt will fail but that will not stop them. Sooner or later someone will present himself as the over-arching authority and will not be the Messiah.
As for Obama, if the ‘birthers’ are right then he may well have dual nationality, or maybe only British citizenship. No Universal Jurisdiction required.
April 13th, 2010 at 8:46 pm
“Where to start? Perhaps firstly by pointing out that any such prosecution could (and probably would) be taken by Catholics around the world as a declaration of war against them by a Protestant judicial system.”
And if Tzipi Livni were to be arrested, it would be considered an act of war against the Jewish people by millions of Jews around the world. Only a fool would underestimate the consequences of such an action for Britain.
April 14th, 2010 at 12:14 am
Thank you, Mr. Shepherd, for bringing this matter to the attention of the general public.
You may not realize it, but you have engaged in a typical Talmudic discussion. To determine the validity of a concept, its most extreme applications are explored. If the principle of universal jurisdiction would not be applied to the Pope’s indiscretions, then it cannot be applied to anyone. To bifurcate the matter by exempting the Pope, would violate the principle of equality before the law. Leftists would see nothing wrong with that logic, as would Fascists. However, to preserve “equality before the law” reasonable people would reject the principle of universal jurisdiction, rather than apply it only where some specially privileged group preferred to do so.
April 14th, 2010 at 12:44 am
Of course, Dawkins, Hitchens, and Robertson have their own axes to grind. Applying universal jurisdiction to the Pope is so absurd and may finally force the British government to modify it, get rid of it, or ignore it.
It is ironic and tragic that the Catholic Church finds itself in so much trouble over pedophilia when this crime is contrary to Christian morality.
Yet, the Islamic prophet Mohammed married a nine-year old and is still considered a moral exemplar in Islam. In more recent times, the Ayatollah Khomeini married a ten-year old when he was a 28-year old seminary student. But nobody prosecuted him in Iran (no problem under Shariah) or tried to apply universal jurisdiction to him in Britain or elsewhere.
April 14th, 2010 at 2:36 am
The actions, or proposed actions by Dawkins and Hitchens, whom I normally respect, are yet another example fo the lawfare that has become so common in the UK.
You’ve pretty much covered all the ground here of this ludicrous, and vaguely disgusting attempt to basically pull what amounts to a stunt.
I will add just these thoughts – and I am Jewish, not Catholic, and hold no brief for the Pope.
The Catholic Church must realize that it has to reform itself, and, as usual, that change can only come from within. Arresting the Pope, which will never happen of course, or even proposing it, will only stiffen resistance to change.
There is a sort of prurient nastiness about this “lawfare” being levied by interest groups against a variety of targets – Israelis, Blair, the Pope, whoever – a kind of desire by some Brits to poke their noses into everyone else’s business with a sort of holier than thou attitude, when, in fact, there is so much that Britain could be blamed for in the past and even now for those opposed to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. There are groups in Britain who believe that they have a higher level of morality and understanding of justice based on some personal issue or other (the Pope, pedophilia, the I/P conflict) that sets them above the rest of us, and allows them to take advantage of a ludicrous “citizen’s arrest” type loophole in British law to embarrass representatives of other countries or religions.
As usual, what starts with the Jews never ends with the Jews. The use of “lawfare” against Israelis is now being copied to the Catholics. Of course, the Catholics never had much to say about it when it was the Israelis being subjected to these ludicrous stunts (and I’ll spare you the well-known poem about this – you know – first they came for ..), shamefully by Jews like Daniel Machover, but now its not only a few million Jews who have sat up and taken notice, but a billion Catholics.
Hopefully, that anger plus, as you say, the foolishness of Dawkins’ and Hitchens’ attempt to embarrass the Pope, will jog the saner elements of British society and lawmakers into action to put an end to “lawfare”.
April 14th, 2010 at 5:06 pm
My recommendation for a suitable ‘arrestee’ :
Ahmadinejad; crimes against Israel, common sense, stability and basic decency.
Again, not to be taken seriously but worth pondering.
April 14th, 2010 at 9:15 pm
I am delighted by this development. By failing to amend the law after the Livni affair, as they promised to do, Britain has precipitated a crisis entirely of its own making.
Hopefully Catholics will not forget this when they cast their vote in the forthcoming election.
April 15th, 2010 at 6:17 am
I also know this figure (Dawkins)- he is by now famous. Well well, well. I have just ONE question to Mr. Dawkins: Would he dare to utter similar sweet-talking about the Muslim faith like he said on WP? Theirein lies the courage of a REAL man, doesn’t it Richard?
April 16th, 2010 at 6:32 pm
Delicious! Well done Dawkins and Hitchens. They have set up a situation to embarrass the life out of the UK Government, which has sat on its hands regarding Universal Jurisdiction, even though they promised to amend it as soon as.
Shows that when you make a promise, you should keep it.
April 19th, 2010 at 10:25 am
Dear Robin, dear fellow commenters:
What are we to make of this essay??? Thought-provoking, hair-raising, moronuc or is it onto something even if it’s grossly crude and histerical?
http://4international.wordpress.com/2010/04/14/people-cannot-escape-
reality-jews-are-in-horrible-danger-from-iran-nuclear-bomb/
April 19th, 2010 at 12:29 pm
Duvid has composed the following rap on this complex subject:
The Vatican Rap
Universal jurisdiction;
Prompts a Papal crucifiction;
Causes caustic Catholic friction;
Needs political interdiction.
When it’s Jews, no legal fiction;
They’re guilty; UK depiction;
British duty dereliction;
International confliction.
April 19th, 2010 at 5:47 pm
Gabor. Very interesting link, although I didn’t get beyond the third sub-head. From his masthead, he may possibly be trying to hitch Serbian nationalism to a Jewish bandwagon, but since I couldn’t stand to read the rest of his tub-thumping Trot sermonising, I will leave others to discover whether this is the case.
April 20th, 2010 at 4:28 pm
J.Isaacs – No, absolutely not! His alluding to Serbs amounts to less than max. 5 percent of the whole essay and he says very sensible and thought-provoking things. The text has many truths in it, but some exaggerations and hyperboles as well.