HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 69916,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/69916/?format=api",
"text_counter": 244,
"type": "other",
"speaker_name": "",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": null,
"content": "Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, it is important to note some issues. For instance, an ambassador of the United States of America (USA) pointed out some of the difficulties that the statute has. He said: “The ICC statute claims to limit jurisdiction over persons to the most serious crimes of international concern”. He observed: “There are not sufficient safeguards in place to prevent purely political persecutions”. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, Marc Grossman actually said: “It is a statute out of a result of a fraudulent outcome built on fraudulent foundation”. Most worrying is when they said, at that time, that all the ratifying countries, except for the populous Nigeria, German and the United Kingdom (UK), were “Lilliputian mice seeking to bell the USA and her citizens”. I had difficulties getting the meaning of the word “Lilliputian”, but the Oxford Dictionary defines it as “extremely small, diminutive, and tinny person from the land of Lilliput, where the people are only 15 centimetres high”. The Collins Dictionary defines a “Lilliputian mice” as “tiny person or being tiny or very small; petty or trivial; imaginary country of tiny inhabitants”. Those are the words describing those who are said to have ratified the ICC statute, according to these individuals. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I think it is important to note that while we have respect for the people who have continued to help this process to be in place, it is important to note that the USA has had a huge impact on it, but what is telling is that immediately after the USA withdrew from the treaty, they moved ahead to try and get members to sign a bilateral immunity agreement. That agreement was meant to guarantee the USA immunity from ICC prosecution, and the USA would grant the same to those who agreed to the bilateral immunity agreements, and in turn punish those who had to sign it. This treaty may have been useful, but it is a big brother/small brother issue. The current President of the USA, Mr. Barack Obama, when he was a senator during the run up to the elections in 2007 was asked: “Should the United States ratify the Rome Statute on the International Criminal Act?”, to which he answered: “The United States should co- operate in the ICC investigations in a way that reflects American sovereignty and promotes our national security interests”. Senator McCain said: “I want us in the ICC, but I am not satisfied that there are enough safeguards”. Hillary Clinton, the current US Secretary of State, said: “Fourth, Europe must acknowledge that the United States has global responsibility that creates unique circumstances. For example, we are more vulnerable to the misuse of International Criminal Court because of the international role we play and the resentments that flow from that uniqueness around the world”. The ICC was meant to be a court for everybody but as it is now, as President Kagame of Rwanda said, it is clear that it targets African developing countries, and does not dispense justice equitably on a global basis. I come from Ndaragua Constituency, where we have integrated Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) and IDPs who are within camps in their thousands. I have said before that if you want me to show you a grave, I will show you a grave of a son who was killed during the tribal clashes. The biggest percentage of the IDPs in Ndaragua is people who were involved in the movement for the freedom of this country. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, one of the reasons as to why we fought for Independence was to avoid a foreigner, using a foreign podium from giving instructions to this country while all of us, including our President, are listening. We have had our difficulties. We have had tribal clashes, mismanagement of our economy, poor"
}