Return to July 22 Front Page ... Home Index
CATHOLIC FAMILY & HUMAN RIGHTS INSTITUTE
866 United Nations Plaza, Suite 4038
New York, New York 10017
Phone: (212) 754-5948 Fax: (212) 754-9291
E-mail: cafhri@cafhri.com Website: www.cafhri.org
FRIDAY FAX
July 18, 1998
Volume 1, Number 40
world approved the adoption of a statute to create a new International
Criminal Court. The court's future remains uncertain, however, as many
powerful countries voted against the statute, including the US, China,
India, and Turkey. Another 21 countries abstained. And it is widely
believed that many others, including Russia and many Muslim states,
won't ratify the treaty even if they sign it (most countries require
both signing and ratification before new international treaties can come
into force).
* Consequently, even if the ICC does secure the threshold of 66
national ratifications needed for the court to come into legal effect,
it won't have the endorsement of the governments of well over half the
world's people. It will also lack the support of at least three of the
five permanent members of the UN Security Council, making its status
even more uncertain.
* Nevertheless, the alliance of Western nations and activist NGOs who
have dominated the Rome negotiations process are claiming victory today.
They contend that even with the notable nations that have opted out, the
ICC will still be able to exercise "universal jurisdiction" and impose
its authority on every country, including the US and the ICC's other
major opponents. This seems to be a brand new notion in international
law.
* With regard to the struggle waged in the Rome between
pro-life/pro-family forces and the radical-feminist Women's Caucus, both
sides are claiming some successes. Radical-feminist and homosexual
activists cite the inclusion of references to "forced pregnancy"  a
Women's Caucus code word for criminalizing any denial of access to
abortion  and to "gender"  another vague and elastic term used to
advance other elements of the feminist and homosexual agendas  as
evidence that both concepts have now been recognized under international
law.
* The pro-life and pro-family contingent counters that virtually all of
the sting has been removed from both terms, courtesy of strictly
limiting definitions. In the ICC Statute, "forced pregnancy" is defined
as "the unlawful confinement of a woman forcibly made pregnant, with the
intent of affecting the ethnic composition of any population or carrying
out other grave violations of international law. This definition shall
not in any way be interpreted as affecting national laws relating to
pregnancy." Representatives of the Holy See delegation, a key player in
negotiating this final compromise language, feel certain that this
definition of "forced pregnancy" can never be used to justify access to
abortion.
* "Gender," meanwhile, is defined as "the two sexes, male and female,
within the context of society." Women's Caucus lobbyists clearly hope
that the "context of society" inclusion leaves sufficient room for
activist judges to interpret the term as legitimizing homosexual
"marriage" and other radical-feminist platforms. However, most
pro-family legal experts involved in the Rome negotiations regard this
as unlikely.