War Crimes Committed in Libya, Says Former Special Court for Sierra Leone Prosecutor

Article originally published by Voice of America (May 4, 2011)

A former prosecutor of the Special Court for Sierra Leone says investigations by the International Criminal Court show war crimes have been committed in Libya by forces loyal to embattled leader Moammar Gadhafi.

Syracuse University Law professor David Crane says the investigations demonstrate pro-Gadhafi forces engaged “intentional firing into the civilian population.” He said, “International humanitarian law strictures require that civilians be protected and not targeted intentionally.”

Crane denies claims that the Hague-based court only targets African leaders for human rights violations and war crimes.

The former prosecutor’s made the remarks as ICC chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo briefed the Security Council Wednesday, on his plans to seek three arrest warrants for crimes against humanity committed in Libya.

Moreno-Ocampo said during a recent trip to Libya, he had uncovered “strong evidence” suggesting violations had occurred since anti-government unrest erupted in February.

David Crane says the International Criminal Court will ensure that perpetrators of war crimes in Libya are prosecuted, despite political challenges and considerations.

“There is politics involved in the removal or indictments of heads of state and their henchmen,” said Crane. “The political aspect comes up with the peace versus justice issue, but there won’t be a permanent general amnesty,” he said.

Crane cited the prosecution of former Liberian President Charles Taylor as an example of international laws not recognizing guarantees to protect heads of state accused of committing war crimes.

The former prosecutor said he is confident the ICC will also look into allegations that anti-Gadhafi forces are responsible for some of the atrocities committed in the Libyan conflict.

He rejected criticisms that the Hague-based court primarily targets African leaders for human rights violations.

“The prosecutor himself or the ICC itself is not focused on Africa. Almost all of the cases the ICC is working in Africa are referred to it either by the Security Council or African state parties,” said Crane.

Case Summary – Kawaiisu Tribe of Tejon v. Salazar

Case summary originally posted on Scribd.com

A Native American tribe in California has filed it’s Second Amended Complaint (SAC), in a lawsuit opposing the environmental document for a luxury resort development near Los Angeles. The Kawaiisu Tribe of Tejon is requesting a preliminary and permanent injunction stopping the Tejon Mountain Village project in Kern County. The Southern California resort development is being sued alleging Unlawful Possession, violations of NAGPRA, Civil Rights and CEQA. County of Kern, California, Tejon Ranch Corporation, Tejon Mountain Village, LLC (TMV) and the Department of Interior are Defendant’s in the Eastern District of California court action.

The EIR for the project lists more than 50 Native American villages and cemetery sites within the project study area and states that the resort corporation, TMV, “own the remains” of the Kawaiisu, and artifacts found in and around the graves, not requiring repatriation to the Tribe as contemplated by NAGPRA. The SAC addresses numerous cases of sacred cultural resource destruction that have been so far identified in conjunction with the proposed development. Plaintiff’s Kawaiisu Tribe of Tejon and Chairman David Laughing Horse Robinson filed the Second Amended Complaint on April 18, 2011.

The Kawaiisu are one of the ancient Great Basin Shoshone Paiute tribes whose pre-European territory extended from Utah to the Pacific Ocean and have continually inhabited the area from time immemorial. The Tribe descends from signatories to the 1849 Treaty with the Utahs, signed on December 30, 1849 and ratified on September 9, 1850. This treaty was the first tribal treaty signed by the United States after the Guadalupe Hidalgo Treaty. The Indian Non-Intercourse Act, 25 USC § 177 is incorporated in Article 4 of the 1849 Treaty and the legal proceeding.

The land, in controversy, was purchased by United States Indian Superintendent Edward F. Beale to establish the Tejon Sebastian Indian Reservation; it was the first Indian reservation in California. The reservation was established by Executive Order in 1853, 10 Stat. 226, 238.