The Howard Government has baulked at a contentious US request that it promise not to hand over Americans accused of war crimes to the International Criminal Court. In what amounts to a rare diplomatic rebuff to the Bush administration, the sensitive US request has been quietly gathering dust within the Canberra bureaucracy for more than two years without an answer since it was first revealed by The Australian in August 2002. The Government denies that it has rejected the US request to sign the bilateral immunity deal, saying yesterday that it was 'still considering' Washington's proposal after 27 months of deliberation. "We'll get back to you, later."
"How much later?"
"Later." |
But by not reaching a conclusion, Australia has so far avoided having to make an embarrassing choice between the wishes of its closest ally and the viability of the ICC - the world war crimes body of which Australia is a founding member. This non-outcome - reminiscent of the BBC comedy series Yes Minister - reflects concern among Australian government lawyers that the US request, as it stands, could not help but undermine the ICC. They have been unable to find a solution that would allow Australia to agree to the deal without breaching its international obligations to the ICC. The Government said yesterday Australia's obligations to the ICC were being given top priority in its deliberations.
"Australia views its obligations as a party to the ICC statute as paramount, and, although aware of US concerns, would not conclude any agreement that is inconsistent with Australia's ICC obligations," a spokeswoman for the Department of Foreign Affairs said.
Any decision by Australia to agree to an immunity deal with the US would be condemned by human rights groups as undermining the integrity of the ICC. The proposed bilateral pact is part of an aggressive global push by the US - backed by threat of sanctions in some cases - to prevent its troops being hauled in front of the court for war crimes without Washington's approval. |