ابعاد جرایم جنگی آمریکا در افغانستان و امکان‌سنجی تعقیب آن در دیوان بین‌المللی کیفری (با تأکید بر رویکردهای رسانه‌ای)

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

دانشیار گروه حقوق دانشگاه پیام‌نور کرمان.

چکیده

عملکرد نیروی نظامی و کارکنان سازمان سیای ایالات‌متحده در افغانستان از منظر حقوق بین‌الملل کیفری؛ قابل تحقیق، تعقیب و محاکمه است. بنابراین بررسی مؤلفه‌های جرایم جنگی با مطالعه موردی وضعیت افغانستان در اساسنامه دیوان بین‌المللی کیفری از اهداف و موضوع این نوشتار است تا به سؤال‌های مرتبط پاسخ داده شود. سؤال اول این‌که تعقیب جرایم جنگی نیروی نظامی و کارکنان سیای ایالات‌متحده متکی بر چه مؤلفه‌ها و ضمانت ‌اجراهایی است؟ سؤال دوم این‌ که رسالت رسانه‌های برون‌مرزی در فراهم کردن زمینه تعقیب عوامل اصلی جنایات جنگی در افغانستان چیست؟ یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که کشتار، حبس، شکنجه و خشونت‌های جنسی علیه غیرنظامیان تنها بخشی از جرایم جنگی قابل‌تعقیب آمریکا در دیوان بین‌المللی کیفری است. این اتهامات، متکی به آموزه‌های حقوق بین‌الملل بشردوستانه و مقررات کنوانسیون‌های چهارگانه ژنو و پروتکل‌های الحاقی آن هستند که ضمانت‌‌اجرای آن در اساسنامه دیوان بین‌المللی کیفری متجلی است. عملکرد نیروی نظامی و کارکنان سازمان سیای آمریکا در وضعیت افغانستان، جلوه‌ای از اعمال سیاست‌های رسمی دولت ایالات‌متحده بوده است که مسئولیت اصلی آن متوجه مقامات ارشد و فرماندهان نظامی آن می‌باشد. از این حیث، رویکرد فعلی دادستان دیوان بین‌المللی کیفری در تحقیقات مقدماتی، دیرهنگام و محدود به تعقیب حداقل جرایم و منتسب به مقامات پایین‌رتبه است که مقبولیت ندارد. رسالت رسانه‌های برون‌مرزی در این حوزه از جمع‌آوری، تحلیل و پخش مستندات وقوع جرایم جنگی در افغانستان تا برقراری ارتباط مستقیم میان آن با سیاست‌های رسمی دولت ایالات‌متحده و دخیل بودن مقامات ارشد آن گسترده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Dimensions of US War Crimes in Afghanistan and Feasibility of Prosecuting it in the ICC (Proposing Media Approaches)

نویسنده [English]

  • Javad Salehi
Associate Professor of Faculty of Law, Payam-e-Noor University. Kerman, Iran
چکیده [English]

The performance of US military and CIA personnel in Afghanistan can be investigated, prosecuted and tried from the perspective of international criminal law. Therefore, the study of the components of war crimes with a case study of the situation in Afghanistan in the ICC Statute is the purpose and subject of this article to answer the relevant questions. The first question is what are the components and guarantees in the prosecution of war crimes by US military and CIA personnel? The second question is what is the mission of the IRIB World Service in providing the basis for prosecuting the main perpetrators of war crimes in the situation in Afghanistan? The research findings show that killings, imprisonment, torture, and sexual violence against civilians are just some of the war crimes committed by US military and CIA personnel that prosecutable at the ICC. These charges are based on the teachings of IHL and the provisions of the Geneva Conventions and its protocols, the enforcement of which is enshrined in the ICC Statute. The actions of the military and CIA personnel in the situation in Afghanistan have been a reflection of the official policies of the US government, whose primary responsibility lies with senior military officials and commanders. In this regard, the current approach of the ICC Prosecutor in the preliminary investigation is late and limited to the prosecution of minimum offenses and attributed to lower-ranking officials, which is not acceptable. The overseas media’ mission in this area ranges from collecting, analyzing, and disseminating war crimes documentation in Afghanistan to linking it directly to official US government policies and involving senior officials.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • International Criminal Court
  • International Humanitarian Law
  • US Military Forces’ War Crimes
  • Afghanistan
  • IRIB World Service

مراجع

رحمانیان، حامد و حیدر پیری (1392)، «بررسی کیفرشناختی جنایات بین‌المللی»، مجله مطالعات حقوقی دانشگاه شیراز، دوره پنجم، شماره 2، پاییز، صص 58- 25.
رمضانی قوام‌آبادی، محمدحسین (1395)، «از شناسایی دولت فلسطین تا عضویت در دیوان کیفری بین‌المللی»، فصلنامه دولت‌پژوهی، سال 2، شماره 7، صص 39-1.
صالحی، جواد (1393)، «ارجاع وضعیت کنیا از سوی دادستان به دیوان کیفری؛ جلوه‌ای از اختیارات دادستان در ماده 15 اساسنامه»، فصلنامه مطالعات بین‌المللی پلیس، سال 4، شماره 18، صص 50-37.
صالحی، جواد (1396)، «چالش‌های دیوان کیفری بین‌المللی در پیگیری پرونده رئیس‌جمهور سودان: از مخالفت اتحادیه آفریقا تا عدم همکاری کشورهای عضو اتحادیه»، فصلنامه پژوهش حقوق عمومی، سال 19، شماره 57، صص 89-69.
کاظمی، احمد (1398)، «جنایات بین‌المللی عربستان سعودی در یمن و چگونگی نقش‌آفرینی دیوان بین‌المللی کیفری (با تاکید بر رسالت رسانه‌های برون‌مرزی)»، پژوهشنامه رسانه بین‌الملل، دوره 4، شماره 4،  صص 150-115.
Akande, D and Dias, Talita de S (2019), “The ICC Pre-Trial Chamber Decision on the Situation in Afghanistan: A Few Thoughts on the Interests of Justice”, EJIL Talk, 18 April 2019, Available at: https://www.ejiltalk.org/the-icc-pre-trial-chamber-decision-on-the-situation-in-afghanistan-a-few-thoughts-on-the-interests-of-justice/.  
Associated Press at The Hague (2016), “US Army and CIA may be Guilty of War Crimes in Afghanistan; Says ICC”, The Guardian, 15 Nov 2016, Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/nov/15/us-army-and-cia-may-be-guilty-of-war-crimesafghanistan-says-icc.
Bassiouni, M. Cherif (2006), “The Institutionalization of Torture Under the Bush Administration”, Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, Vol. 37, PP: 389-425.
Bouwknegt, T (2019), “Gbagbo; An Acquittal Foretold”, JUSTICEINFO.NET, 31 Jan. 2019, Available at: https://www.justiceinfo.net/en/tribunals/icc/40156- gbagbo-an-acquittal-foretold.html.  
Brooks, E. Rosa (2004), “War Everywhere, National Security Law and the Law of Armed Conflict in the Age of Terror”, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 153, PP: 675-761.
Brownlie, Ian (1998), Principles of Public International Law, Fifth edition, New York: Oxford University Press.
Committee against Torture (2014), “Concluding observations on the combined third to fifth periodic reports of the United States of America”, U.N. Doc. cat/c/usa/co/3-5, 19 December 2014, Available at: https://www.ecoi.net/en/file/local/1327013/1930_1420728509_g1424723.pdf.
Committee against Torture (2008), “General Comment No.2, Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment”, CAT/C/GC/2, 24 January 2008.
Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, 75 UNTS 287, 12 August 1949.
Droege, C (2007), “In Truth the Leitmotiv: the Prohibition of Torture and Other Forms of Ill-treatment in International Humanitarian Law”, International Review of the Red Cross, Vol. 89, NO.867, PP: 515-541.
Daniel, M; Sangeeta, S and Sandesh, S (2014), International Human Rights Law, 2th ed., Oxford University Press.
Department of Defense, Interrogation Log Detainee 063, 23 Nov. 2002–11 Jan 2003, Available at: http://www.time.com/time/2006/log/log.pdf.
Fletcher, L and Eric, S (2009), The Guantanamo Effect: Exposing The Consequences of U.S. Detention and Interrogation Practices, University of California Press.
Ginbar, Y (2010), Why not Torture Terrorists? Moral, Practical, and Legal Aspects of the Ticking Bomb Justification for Torture, Oxford University Press.
Goldston, A. James (2019), “Don’t Give Up on the ICC”, FOREIGN POLICY, 8 Aug. 2019, Available at: https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/08/08/dont-give-up-on-the-icc-hague-war-crimes/. 
Guilfoyle, D (2019a), “This is not Fine: The International Criminal Court in Trouble”, part iii, ejil: talk!, 25 Mar. 2019, Available at:https://www.ejiltalk.org/part-iii-this-is-not-fine-the-international-criminal-court-in-trouble/.  
Guilfoyle, D (2019b), “This is not Fine: The International Criminal Court in Trouble”, Part I, EJIL: TALK, 21 Mar. 2019, Available at:http://www.ejiltalk.org/part-i-this-is-not-fine-the-international-criminal-court-in-trouble.    
Guilfoyle, D (2019c), “A Tale of Two Cases: Lessons for the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court”, Part II, EJIL: TALK!, 29 Aug. 2019, Available at: http://www.ejiltalk.org/a-tale-of-two-cases-lessons-for-the-prosecutor-of-the-international-criminal-court-part-ii/.  
Heller, J. Kevin (2019), “Can the PTC Review the Interests of Justice?”, Opinio Juris, 12 April 2019, Available at:  https://opiniojuris.org/2019/04/12/can-the-ptc-review-the-interests-of-justice/
International Committee of the Red Cross (2007), “ICRC Report on the Treatment of Fourteen ‘High Value’ Detainees in CIA Custody”, Available at: http://www.nybooks.com/media/doc/2010/04/22/icrc-report.pdf.
International Committee of the Red Cross (2016), Commentary on the First Geneva Convention, Available at: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/ihl/full/GCI-commentary.
International Court of Justice (1986), Case Concerning Military and Paramilitary Activities in and Against Nicaragua, Merits, Nicaragua v. United States of America, 27 June 1986.
International Criminal Court (2017), Situation in the Republic of Burundi, “Decision Pursuant to Article 15 of the Rome Statute on the Authorization of an Investigation into the Situation in the Republic of Burundi”, Case No. ICC-01/17-X-9-US-Exp, 9 November 2017.
International Criminal Court (2019), Situation in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, “Decision Pursuant to Article 15 of the Rome Statute on the Authorisation of an Investigation into the Situation in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan”, Case No. ICC-02/17-PTC-II, 12 April 2019.
International Criminal Court (2020), Judgment on the Appeal against the Decision on the Authorisation of an Investigation into the Situation in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, Case No. ICC-02/17 OA4-Appeals Chamber, 5 March 2020, Available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/CourtRecords/CR2020_00828.PDF.
Jacobs, Dov (2019), “ICC Pre-Trial Chamber Rejects OTP Request to Open an Investigation in Afghanistan: Some Preliminary Thoughts on an Ultra Vires Decision”, 12 April 2019, Available at: https://dovjacobs.com/2019/04/12/icc-pre-trial-chamber-rejects-otp-request-to-open-an-investigation-in-afghanistan-some-preliminary-thoughts-on-an-ultra-vires-decision/
Martin, B. Julie (2006), “The International Criminal Court: Defining Complementarity and Divining Implications for the United States”, Journal of Loyola University Chicago International Law Review, Vol. 4, PP: 107-133.
Memorandum (2002a), “Interrogation of Al Qaeda Operative”, 1 Aug. 2002, Available at:  http://media.luxmedia.com/aclu/olc_08012002_bybee.pdf.
Memorandum (2002b), “Request for Approval of Counter-Resistance Strategies, 11 Oct. 2002, Available at: http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/usdocs/guantanamo/d20040622doc3.pdf.
Office of the Prosecutor (2016), “Report on Preliminary Examination Activities 2016”, 14 Nov. 2016, Available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/otp/161114-otp-rep-PE_ENG.pdf.
Paust, J (2004), “Executive Plans and Authorizations to Violate International Law Concerning Treatment and Interrogation of Detainees”, Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, Vol. 43, NO. 3, PP: 811-863.
United Nations Security Council (2001), “Resolution 1368”, U.N. Doc. S/RES/1368, 56th Sess., 4370th Meeting, 12 September 2001.
Rona, Gabor (2019), “More on the what’s Wrong with the ICC’s Decision on Afghanistan”, Opinio Juris, 15 April 2019, Available at: http://opiniojuris.org/2019/04/15/more-on-whats-wrong-with-the-iccs-decision-on-afghanistan/.
Sterio, Milena (2020), “The International Criminal Court: Current Challenges and Prospect of Future Success”, Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, Vol. 52(1), pp. 467-478.
Takemura, H (2018), “The Asian Region and the International Criminal Court”, in; Yumiko Nakanishi (ed.), Contemporary Issues in Human Rights Law: Europe and Asia, Springer Nature Publication, PP: 107-125.
Vaid, K (2012), “What Counts as State Action Under Article 17 of the Rome Statute? Applying the ICC's Complementarity Test to Non-Criminal Investigations by the United States into War Crimes in Afghanistan”, New York University Journal of International Law and Politics, Vol. 44, NO.2, PP: 573-628.
Ventura, J. Manuel (2020), “Automatic Criminal Liability for Unlawful Confinement (Imprisonment) as a War Crime? A Potential Consequence of Denying Non-State Armed Groups the Power to Detain in NIACs”, in: Ezequiel Heffes; Marcos D. Kotlik and Manuel J. Ventura (eds.), International Humanitarian Law and Non-State Actors, Debates, Law and Practice, Asser Press, PP: 149-168.
Weatherall, Thomas (2015), "juscogens and sovereign immunity: reconciling divergence in contemporary jurisprudence", georgetown journal of international law, Vol. 46.
Wedgwood, R (2002), “Agora: Military Commissions, Al Qaeda, Terrorism and Military Commissions”, American Journal of International Law, Vol. 96, PP: 328-337.
White House Office of the Press Security (2002), “Statement by the Press Secretary on the Geneva Convention”, Press Release, 7 Feb. 2002, Available at: http://www.state.gov/s/l/38727.htm.

فایل ها

اشتراک گذاری

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار