At 11:45 26-9-01 -0500, you wrote: >On Wed, 26 Sep 2001 12:19:10 +0200, Bernie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Sam H. wrote: >>> I had for long been aware of the "Universal Declaration of Human >>> Rights". I tell you that this is just some eyewash that was drawn >>> up in an attempt to make the United Nations look good in the eyes >>> of the world. There are no effective provisions for enforcement. >>> In visiting the URL I noted that Article 12 does not apply anywhere >>> in the world. Articles 16(1), 20(2), 23, 24, 25, and 26 do not apply >>> in the United States and neither would some of these articles apply >>> in several European countries. > >> This one was interesting for our earlier discussions: > >> Article 11 >> (1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed >> innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he >> has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence. > >> So by blaiming bin Laden f�r the attacks one would violate the human >> rights, so you forgot that the US breaks this one Sam. > >No it does not. Bin Laden refuses to voluntarily surrender to the >authorities to be taken into custody and to stand trial. In a trial >conducted by the United States he would be presumed innocent until >proven guilty. Since Bin Laden is accused of war crimes any nation >has the right to exercise jurisdiction. A similar situation occurred >in the case of the capture of Adolph Eichmann in Argentina by the >Israeli authorities. They went into Argentina and took him into >custody and brought him to Israel where he was given a perfectly fair >trial. In his trial, Eichmann was accorded the same rights as any >Israeli citizen who is accused of a crime. Since Eichmann was accused >of war crimes it didn't matter where his crimes were committed, nor >did it matter under whose jurisdiction he was living at the time of >his arrest, nor did it matter who exercised arrest authorities. Any >authority from any country had the right go anywhere in the world to >hunt him down and find him and place him under arrest.
What would happen if B.L. would land on Schiphol, Amsterdam, and ask political asylum in NL, where he cannot be extradited to a country where he would face death penalty? (We've already seen a Scottish trial in NL on request of Khadafi, against the two suspects from the Lockerbie crash, so why not an American trial under UN supervision?) Really, I still hope that BL will come to the conclusion that keeping Milosevic cs. company in safe & comfortable Scheveningen is an acceptable way to go. Bart
