Time on Saif Gaddafi

Time has an interesting article up about Saif’s reappearance in Tripoli.  The whole thing is well worth a read, but I was struck by these paragraphs about the ICC:

The rebels were not the only ones whose credibility was in doubt on Tuesday. So too was that of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, which has indicted Saif al-Islam, his father, and Gaddafi’s security chief Abdallah al-Senousi on charges of crimes against humanity for allegedly organizing security forces to fire upon and kill unarmed protesters last February, before the rebels in eastern Libya took up weapons. Under ICC rules, a defendant is brought to trial after an arrest by a foreign government. Yet Libya has never signed the ICC treaty, leaving the transfer of Saif and his father in considerable doubt — many rebels, in fact, would prefer to try the men in Libya.

Despite that, ICC officials had said on Monday that they were discussing with rebel leaders how to transfer Saif to stand trial in The Hague. On Tuesday, that changed: ICC spokesman Fadi el Abdallah told the BBC that despite several attempts, the organization had never received proof that Saif was under arrest. “We were trying to confirm the information,” Abdallah said. “We tried to contact different persons from the NTC and got different information.” In a similar way, information about Libya’s war depends on who one asks.

The first paragraph is just sloppy journalism.  Libya may not have ratified the Rome Statute, but paragraph 5 of SC Res. 1970, which referred the situation in Libya to the ICC, provides that “the Libyan authorities shall cooperate fully with and provide any necessary assistance to the Court and the Prosecutor pursuant to this resolution.”  Although compliance is always an issue with international organizations, I think it is safe to say that most states would be more likely to ignore the ICC than the Security Council.

The second paragraph, unfortunately, indicates that the ICC is in disarray both internally and externally concerning Saif’s status.  If the ICC had not received proof that Saif was in custody, Moreno-Ocampo had no business confirming that he was.  His rash public statement simply reinforces his image — all too widespread, and all too justified — as an inept prosecutor far more concerned with publicity than the credibility of his office or the legitimacy of the Court.