Belgium being crazy and hypocritical or "Can't we war anymore?"

[Saint Marcus]

Perhaps it's time for President Bush to announce the beginning of "Operation Way Too Long Delayed Justice'".

So let's sue the Americans for what they did to the native americans, or for the apartheid-like against the blacks in the last century.

anyway, members of the royal family are immune to prosecution.

[kolpo]

Was the royal house of Belgium ever properly tried for it's atrocities in Africa? You know they were largely responsible for the wholesale land grab of Africa by the various European nations in the 1880s. It seems that when stories of how the Belgians were torturing Africans in order to persuade them to work on their plantations and mines the other nations of Europe rushed to protect the rest of Africa by scarfing up all of the "free" land. Perhaps it's time for President Bush to announce the beginning of "Operation Way Too Long Delayed Justice'".

1880? All those who did that are dead now, you can't sue death people

It looks me naive to think that the other European nations went to Africa to help the natives, all European powers wanted to simply exploit the local population to become rich the Belgians where no more worse or better then those other European powers who also commited many atrocities. All european powers believed in that time that black people where animals and treaded them according(read history books and you will see that that is shamefull but true).

In fact are there very few colonies where the native population wasn't the victim of atrocities.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Rogan Josh
Peres seems to me to be the only man in ME politics with any brains or humanity...

I'm starting to feel the same way about Binyamin Netanyahu.

"Saint" Marcus: So let's sue the Americans for what they did to the native americans, or for the apartheid-like against the blacks in the last century.

It's always amusing to see people resort to the childish "he did it too" defense.

[Saint Marcus]

Europe has commited many antrocities in the past, and it's not something we are proud of. However, just about all of those acts were commited more than half a century ago at least. The belgian law doesn't cover those pre-ww2 cases, only more recent cases world wide.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Saint Marcus
The belgian law doesn't cover those pre-ww2 cases, only more recent cases world wide.

On what legal basis does Belgium have the authority to try people in a national court for crimes that were not committed within its sovereign territory nor against any of its citizens?

[Saint Marcus]

It's always amusing to see people resort to the childish "he did it too" defense.

well, he started it

jk

point is, just about every country on this planet has commited antrocities. The US, Europe, Israel, Japan, etc. Belgium included. But it's silly of course to sue entire countries or families for things happening more than half a century ago. This clearly is not the case in the suits against Israeli leaders, who commited the acts not that long ago.

[Natan]

Dinodoc, Rogan, let's be fair, several such people exist, you just haven't heard of them. The Palestinians have Sari Nusseibeh and probably a few more guys I haven't heard of, the Israelis have a few sane and humble fellows too, like Rabbis Michael Melchior and Moshe Gafni, or Salah Tarif and Natan Sharansky.

[Natan]

Originally posted by Saint Marcus
point is, just about every country on this planet has commited antrocities. The US, Europe, Israel, Japan, etc. Belgium included. But it's silly of course to sue entire countries or families for things happening more than half a century ago. This clearly is not the case in the suits against Israeli leaders, who commited the acts not that long ago.

Fine, then let's start a trial for those responsible for the shameful Belgian pullout from Rwanda which knowingly left hundreds of thousands to die, and the NATO pullout from Srebenica. Afterwards, we'll discuss the tribunal for the Kosovo war and allied war crimes in Iraq.

Moral: This is a can of worms. If Belgium wants to survive to make fine chocolates another day, they should leave it unopened.

[Saint Marcus]

On what legal basis does Belgium have the authority to try people in a national court for crimes that were not committed within its sovereign territory nor against any of its citizens?

There is no international law that prohibits such laws, so it's allowed. Belgium did not sign and ratify an international treaty that prohibits prosecution of "people in a national court for crimes that were not committed within its sovereign territory nor against any of its citizens".

[Saint Marcus]

Moral: This is a can of worms. If Belgium wants to survive to make fine chocolates another day, they should leave it unopened.

Survive? Oh yeah, I can already see Israel invade Belgium for sueing Sharon. LOL. There is nothing other countries can do about this, and furthermore, the Belgian initiative is getting more and more support from other European nations.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Saint Marcus
There is no international law that prohibits such laws, so it's allowed.

So basically they pulled the justification for this meaningless measure as an effort to make themselves feel better and to partially make up for thier imperialist past out of thier arse. Is that what you're telling me?

Edit: Furthermore, what is thier reason for using this law so selectively? Why has Belgium made no legal efforts in the examples Natan listed?

[Saint Marcus]

So basically they pulled the justification for this meaningless measure as an effort to make themselves feel better and to partially make up for thier imperialist past out of thier arse. Is that what you're telling me?

Yep, pretty much. Belgium regrets it's past, and this is one way of doing something back. another reason is that Belgium is lobbying for an international court to handle cases of genocide and crimes against humanity. since that court is not yet here, and thanks to the US will probably never get here, the belgians feel that they should do it themselves to, at least, prosecute some of the people responsable for acts of genocide in the world. I believe only two people have been convicted yet though, for crimes against humanity in Ruanda. It's a start, and hopefully soon more people will be prosecuted for what they did and the many people that died because of them.

[Saint Marcus]

Furthermore, what is thier reason for using this law so selectively? Why has Belgium made no legal efforts in the examples Natan listed?

Because no person or organisation have requested a trial on them yet. The Belgian governement doesn't pick who will be prosecuted or not. If nobody request a trial for those people mentioned, or if nobody presents an actual case, it will be dismissed easily. That's the reason only two people have been tried yet, and convicted.

So if you want others to be tried, go report them yourself and build a case. The Belgian governement isn't going to do that work all themselves.

[DinoDoc]

The main question I have is, "Why are they only going after the little fish?" Why have we seen no action against former President Bill Clinton, and every other European leader who took part in the flagrant violation of international law that was the Kosovo War?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Saint Marcus
Because no person or organisation have requested a trial on them yet.

Then the law in and of itself is truely meaningless and allows itself to be used as a game for political point scoring if only people with axes to grind have to ask the Belgian government to "put on trial" people who the government considers to have committed murder.