Darfur referral to the ICC: call to action

I am writing to urge you to support a United Nations Security Council referral of the crisis in Darfur, Sudan, to the International Criminal Court(ICC). The U.S. State Department's proposal to create another independent tribunal to try the guilty parties in Darfur would only prolong the suffering in the region, and accomplish none of the stated reasons for opposing the International Criminal Court.

Right now in Darfur, the Janjaweed militia, supported by the Sudanese government, is executing a scorched earth campaign that has killed tens of thousands of individuals and displaced almost two million more. A United Nations Commission of Inquiry stated that the International Criminal Court is the "single best mechanism" and the "only credible way" to prosecute those responsible. An international consensus has emerged supporting ICC referral.

Yet the Bush Administration proposes to establish another ad hoc tribunal to deal with this issue. As your constituent I urge you to consider the following: (1) An ad hoc tribunal will prolong the death and destruction inDarfur. It took two years for the Sierra Leone court to begin functioning after U.N. authorization, and one year for the Yugoslavia court to do the same. If history repeats itself, the Sudanese government will continue to rape and kill with impunity in Darfur while a perfectly functional court designed to address these types of crimes goes unused. (2) The ICC is better equipped to deal with non-compliance by the Sudanese government. Ad hoc tribunals have only a limited time in which to work, allowing criminals like Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic to hide from the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia until the tribunal shuts down. As a permanent institution, the ICC can assure that no criminal avoids justice by hiding from the law. (3) An ICC Prosecution does not harm anyAmerican interests. While some U.S. policymakers have expressed general concerns about the ICC, none of those concerns are implicated here. No U.S. nationals are at risk of prosecution, as ICC authorization would be limited strictly to the Darfur situation. (4) The U.S. would pay more for an ad hoc tribunal. As the U.N. Security Council and African Union strongly oppose an ad hoc tribunal, the U.S. would have to pay the vast majority of the $100 million annual cost of this new institution. While the U.S. claims that adding this tribunal to the existing infrastructure in Tanzania would reduce costs, that institution is already expanding just to meet its current needs, meaning that a new addition would need to provide its own infrastructure and staffing.

I applaud Congress's July 24, 2004 action condemning the Darfur situation as "genocide," and our recent U.N. proposal to send 10,000 peacekeepers to the region. However, American support for an ad hoc tribunal is undermining our strong support for the victims in Darfur. The delay involved in setting up a tribunal means justice deferred, at a time when ten thousand people are being massacred every month. The ICC can address this crisis quickly and effectively. As a permanent institution, the ICC stands as a constant reminder that these types of crimes do not go unpunished. By supporting the referral of the situation in Darfur to the ICC, you will help prevent similar crimes from occurring in the future.