Saturday
I had a dream last night and thought: what the fuck!... let's share it.
In that astonishing dream U.S. comes before the G8 Mafia Landlords pushing for punishment and sanctions to fall upon their Master, enumerating some of the reasons as follows:
- both possessing and using weapons of mass destruction and selling them as it sees fit just to
profit from the chaos
- possessing around (officially) +8.000 Nuclear weapons being the only ones to actually ever
have used them against other nations
- hundreds of thousands of civilians murdered, maimed and shred into pieces, countries
left in ruins after being sucked to their marrows, humanitarianly robbed of their resources,
sovereignty and cultures, (the irony) forever in debt
- establishing an endemic culture of torture and persecution in and outside it's borders against
foreign citizens and its own (including its most dignified soldiers and citizens who had the
balls to try and break the the cycle of abuse)
- extra-judicial murder in 20+ countries both covertly and openly
- treating foreign and it's own citizens as cattle to be herded in a police state where the rule of
law follows the master and not the other way around
&, in a manner of closure,
U.S. vowed, humbly, to FUCKIN' STOP PREACHING the rest of the world on how they should be following it's fantastic, modern, come in all shapes, sizes and colours, BULLSHIT fakery of evolution, multiculturalist freedom and democracy.
yeah, it was a hell of a dream!
Friday
NATO: Please do not come to my aide. Please, do not protect me. Thank You!
Your legacy is well burned in my retina.
“There are mirrors Which should have wept with shame and horror” - Pablo Neruda
Libya: One Year On (Part 2): Recording NATO's War Crimes ( 5)
By T.J. Coles. Axis of Logic
Tuesday, Apr 3, 2012
Editor's Note: We are pleased to publish this second installment on our series, "Libya: One Year On," by T.J. Coles. It is utterly important that the details of the 2011 US/Israeli/NATO destruction and continuing occupation of this peaceful country be documented for the historical record. While many examples exist of the old adage, "The victor writes the history," the "victor" no longer has control of the press as it once did. While they can continue to write their revisionisms (deceptions), the alternative media now has truth-to-power in producing permanent records of what has really happened in the imperialist barbarism executed against sovereign nations like Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya.
Humanity is indebted to T.J. Coles and other scholars for their pain-staking, exhaustive research and comprehensive coverage of these wars. The history being written today is not only in words but also in images. We include a few of them below and some are graphic.
The war crimes of the US, Israel and NATO in Libya are staggering and thus far have been carried out with impunity. But if this weary old planet survives their economic and environmental crimes, history will judge them, their decision-makers and the corporate cabal that funds their wars ... and without mercy.
- Les Blough, Editor
| |
NATO war planes attacking Libya in Spring, 2011
|
| |
| A proud Nicolas Sarkozy ordered the French Air Force to lead thedevastating aerial attack on Libya with Mirage jets from the Solenzara 126 Air Base on Corsica Island in the Mediterranean on March 24, 2011. |
| |
| One of the thousands of NATO air strikes beginning in March, 2011. By October they repeated this bombing of Libyan cities and towns 9,300 times. |
| |
Tripole Street in Misrata before and after
|
| |
Martyr Square, Tripoli, before and after the bombing
|
| |
| The city of Sirte, birthplace of Col. Qadaffi and the last stronghold of the Libyan Resistance was utterly destroyed by NATO bombing when thousands of people were killed, maimed and displaced. |
| |
| By September, at least 13 mass graves had been found in Libya. ICRC spokesperson Steven Anderson said "more mass graves are being found every week". Unidentified bodies were exhumed for burial in unmarked graves. There were 12 different such sites in and around Tripoli according to the Geneva-based Red Cross. |
| |
To no avail the women of Misrata demonstrated
in the streets against the NATO assault. |
|
“There are mirrors
Which should have wept with shame and horror”
- Pablo Neruda
|
From at least August 2011 to the beginning of the coup, UK special forces secretly trained the anti-Gaddafi opposition on a farm in Libya.1 Their SAS colleagues, who had previously trained Gaddafi’s forces,2 were apparently so annoyed about the deception that they attempted to leak a 70-page document concerning the secret services’ role in dividing to conquer.3
The coup was first attempted in 1995 when MI6 wired £100,000 to the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group in order to provoke “orchestrated unrest in Benghazi ... The coup plotters expected to establish control of Libya at the end of March 1996 ... want[ing] rapprochement with the West.”4 It would appear that the botched effort succeeded in February 2011, when an armed uprising spread across the country.
After the failed coup of 1995-6, Gaddafi agreed in word but not in deed to economically liberalise the country for Western businesses.5 In anticipation that Gaddafi would renege on his pledge, European countries began mounting opposition groups. These included: the London-based Libyan Muslim Brotherhood; the London-based National Conference for the Libyan Opposition, led by Ibrahim Sahad of the National Front for the Salvation of Libya, another UK-based opposition group; the Manchester-based Libyan Constitutional Union; and the Germany-UK-based Libyan League for Human Rights.6
Just as the coup began in February 2011, Robin Lam, Director-general of the Libyan-British Business Council, which boasts a 150-company membership (including Shell, BP, Barclays and HSBC), wrote that:
Our contacts have always gone beyond the Qadhafi regime and include some of the key figures who are now forming the nucleus of an alternative government in Benghazi. Our contacts have enabled us to keep in direct touch with developments in Libya in the last two weeks and as soon as the dust settles, we plan an early visit to the country to engage and expand our network. … Lord Trefgarne will call on Lord Green of Hurstpierpoint, the Minister of Trade, to put the seal on this process.7
UK Elite Forces acknowledged that “Since the early days of the rebellion, British special forces, along with their French, Jordanian and Qatari counterparts have been arming, advising and training rebel forces,”8 in violation of Britain’s own UNSCR 1970. The rebels, and thus by proxy the UK, engaged in massive human rights abuses during the coup and NATO bombing.
Rebel War Crimes
Contrary to hysterical media lies about Gaddafi’s alleged plan to “ethnically cleanse” Benghazi,9 the UK-armed-and-trained rebels committed an actual ethnic cleansing of Sub-Saharan Libyans, sparking a major refugee crisis—the consequences of which they continue to suffer. The UN Human Rights Council’s Report of the International Commission of Inquiry in Libya reported a year after the NATO assault that the "Thuwar" (NATO mercenaries) committed serious violations, including war crimes and breaches of international human rights law, the latter continuing at the time of the present report. The Commission found these violations to include unlawful killing, arbitrary arrest, torture, enforced disappearance, indiscriminate attacks, and pillage. It found in particular that the Thuwar are targeting the Tawergha [black Libyans] and other communities.10
A year after the bombing, Amnesty reported that
The 30,000 residents of the town of Tawargha [the entire population], who were forcibly displaced during the conflict, are still barred from returning to their town, where their homes have been looted and burned down. They remain in poorly resourced camps in Benghazi, Tripoli and elsewhere in Libya and face an uncertain future.11
The Western media were complicit in harming Sub-Saharan Africans. By accusing them of being “mercenaries” for the sole purpose of demonising Gaddafi, they were dehumanised in the minds of Western publics. In March 2011, Amnesty reported no evidence concerning Gaddafi’s use of mercenaries.12 In 2012, Amnesty mentioned “suspected foreign “mercenaries” – most of whom were in fact migrant workers.”13Conversely, the UK’s Olive Group is a mercenary company, and a member of the Libyan-British Business Council—a fact conveniently ignored by the media.14 In the Western media lexicon, UK mercenaries are “privative security contractors.”
By July 2011, 1.1 million Libyans had been affected by the bombing and coup, and “fighting in Nafousa, Zawia and Misrata ha[d] resulted in an acute humanitarian crisis in these areas. Secondly, there are growing tensions elsewhere as the effects of the sanctions are increasingly felt,” the World Health Organization reported. If we are to believe the lies about humanitarian intervention, the Western allied powers sanctioned Libya—putting 280,000 at risk of starvation—in order to save Libyans from Gaddafi. “[T]he continuing conflict is severely jeopardizing its ability to maintain health care services”, WHO reported. Despite this, NATO kept bombing and the SAS/MI6 continued to train and arm the rebels. “Recent assessments in Misratah and other parts of eastern Libya found that hospitals were overwhelmed, medical staff were exhausted, and supplies of essential drugs and medical supplies were running critically low.”15
UNICEF reported on 17 October that thirty schools had been damaged in Ajdabiya and Misrata alone. “Burnt out tanks, armoured cars and spent ammunition shells line the road between Benghazi and Ajdabiya, an apocalyptic landscape left by the battles that took place here.”16 Also in that month, the Red Cross reported that the organization “has been able to meet with representatives of civil society, who reported dire needs in terms of drinking water, food supplies – in particular baby food – and hygiene items.”17
A year after the bombing, “Tomina and Kararim are ghost towns because Misrata officials [of the Western-backed interim government] are blocking thousands of people who fled from returning home,” said Peter Bouckaert, emergencies director of Human Rights Watch.18
Amnesty reported that “torture is being carried out by officially recognized military and security entities as well by a multitude of armed militias operating outside any legal framework.”19 This should be of grave concern to UK taxpayers because “We are supporting the NTC’s own plans for political transition in Libya, through the Friends of Libya group and the allocation of up to £20.6m in UK funding”, the Foreign Office reported.20
Children in Pieces
According to UNICEF, the West’s “humanitarian intervention” put 2 million Libyan children at risk of death, injury, illness, starvation, dehydration, and/or forced migration. Commenting on the Western media’s shameful omission of children during the coup and bombing, UNICEF noted in April 2011 the almost complete absence of children from images and reports out of the country. We didn’t see children, we didn’t hear from them and – much as we probed and queried – we simply didn’t know what was really happening to them. We do now, and it’s worse than we feared … We now know a little of their lives, because we have learned how they died. The youngest child to bear the brunt of the fighting in Misrata was reportedly nine months old, and most of those who died over the last two weeks were under the age of 10 … Many other children are traumatized by what they are going through. Many have limited access to essential daily needs, including water and food, and none are in school. Other children, like those in the city of Zintan, south-west of Tripoli, are completely cut off. Trapped amid the shooting and shelling, they may be experiencing a tragedy similar to the events in Misrata.21
| |
A few of the many Libyan children killed by NATO governments.
|
Amanda Melville, a Child Protection Officer for UNICEF, “highlighted the tremendous emotional toll war takes on a child.” She noted that “Children are experiencing a range of different problems. I mean, most of them are related to feeling afraid.”22 A UNICEF reporter wrote that
The most obvious threats to children are the weapons around them. Landmines and explosive remnants of war contaminate areas around Misrata, Ajdabiya and the Nafusa Mountains … In some cases, the damage done to children by the conflict is not physical, but psychological. Many Libyan children who have been through traumatic experiences are now in urgent need of psycho-social support. Parents at two displacement camps I visited recently, near the coastal city of Al-Bayda, told me stories of their young children’s near-constant nightmares and insomnia. In Benghazi, a three-year-old girl at a children’s recreation club burst into tears because she thought the camera hanging from my shoulder was a gun.23
What kind of adults would ever put children in that position? Presumably adults who were themselves badly affected in childhood and have yet to grow up—people like the SAS, MI6, Clinton, Obama, Sarkozy, Cameron, Clegg, and Hague.
Boat People
From late March to 1 December 2011, at least 1090 verifiable deaths of Libyan boat refugees fleeing across the Mediterranean to Europe were confirmed by the Western press. In reality, the figure is likely much higher. In many cases, the men, women, and children were turned away by the very European countries that trained and armed the rebels and initiated the bombing. The refugees were left to drown by NATO ships and aircraft, which stood by. The reason is simple, and was explained by numerous European think-tanks in the previous years: Europe does not want an influx of immigrants from North African countries.24
As for NATO, the reason for its deliberate inaction is also simple: NATO’s self-appointed role is pipeline and resource “security”, not humanitarianism; the latter is a PR pretext.25 Médecins Sans Frontières issued the following statement. The organization criticises inconsistent European policies claiming to protect civilians by engaging in a war while closing its borders to them … MSF draws attention to the discrepancy between the reception offered by Tunisia and Egypt – which have accepted nearly 630,000 people fleeing neighbouring Libya – and that provided by European states, which have turned back boat people – who are risking their lives to reach Europe – from their territorial lands and waters.26
“Since the end of March [2011], two vessels sailing from Libya have disappeared -- one carrying 320 people and the other 160,” UPI quoted Laura Boldrini, spokeswoman for the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (Italy), as saying.27 Time magazine reported a group of 72 African [sic] migrants — men, women and a few children, from Eritrea, Ethiopia, Sudan and Nigeria — drifting on the Mediterranean for 16 days in late March and early April … watched their stocks of water and cookies steadily dwindle. Those supplies had been dropped onto their boat, they said, by a helicopter marked “ARMY,” after its Ghanaian captain had phoned a refugee organization in Rome to send help. … Days later, survivors say, two helicopters lifted off from a nearby warship — believed by Guardian reporters to have been France’s Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier — and flew low over the refugee boat. The passengers held up the two babies onboard, to show the pilots the desperation of their plight. The pilots flew away. Then, as the boat drifted, its fuel tanks empty, the passengers began to die of starvation, one by one, until just 10 were left alive.
Ethiopian survivor Abu Kirke “said he survived by eating two tubes of toothpaste and drinking his own urine.” On 6 April, “about 250 people drowned when their boat sank off the Italian island of Lampedusa.”28Commenting on the previous disaster, the Guardian reported that “the boat encountered a number of European military units including a helicopter and an aircraft carrier after losing fuel and drifting, but no rescue attempt was made and most of the 72 people on board eventually died of thirst and hunger.”29 CNN reported in May 2011 that “Hundreds -- possibly thousands -- of African migrants have drowned or disappeared at sea trying to flee Libya for Europe.”30
Also in May, “The UN sa[id] almost all of the estimated 600 African migrants who were on board an overcrowded ship that sank off the Libyan coast are believed to have died,” the Associated Press reported. Between 25 March and 10 May alone “About 14,800 [refugees] have made the gruelling journey across the Mediterranean in rickety ships run by smugglers who rarely provide enough food and water. … At least 800 people had been lost at sea in three boat sinkings before the latest ship went down with 600 aboard off Tripoli”, AP reported.31 In June, the Socialist Worker reported that
Hundreds of refugees from Libya were left to drown by Nato ships … They say that their sinking vessel appealed for help from passing Nato and Italian ships, but none would stop. The United Nations (UN) says that more than 150 people died when a boat overloaded with 850 refugees fleeing Libya’s capital Tripoli sank in the Mediterranean [in late May-early June] … One man died after becoming so mad with hunger he ate his own shit. … Mothers and their children are often separated into different [Tunisian refugee] camps, not knowing if the other is even alive.32
The Associated Press reported in August that
Twenty-five African migrants trying to reach Italy from Libya died in the hold of a rickety boat so packed with people that they could not get out as they struggled to breathe … The 15-metre boat was carrying 296 people, including women and children … As the air became unbreathable from exhaust fumes, migrants tried to exit but the boat was too packed for those standing above to move aside.33
The Daily Mail reported in December 2011 that
Around 100 Libyan refugees are believed to have died after a boat carrying them got into difficulties off the Italian island of Lampedusa … Many were understood to have been badly dehydrated when they were found, while the Italian media reported that ‘dozens and dozens of people’ had died of thirst and hunger. … [Some 300 people, including pregnant women] had been crammed into the drifting 65ft boat for more than 36 hours.34
Anglo-American-NATO War Crimes
The Shell, Statoil, Talisman Energy-sponsored International Crisis Group, chaired by such bastions of human rights as Turki al-Faisal, Shimon Peres and Zbigniew Brzezinksi, admitted that
Although the declared rationale of this intervention was to protect civilians, civilians are figuring in large numbers as victims of the war, both as casualties and refugees, while the leading Western governments supporting NATO’s campaign make no secret of the fact that their goal is regime change.
Contrary to media lies about immediate regime change, “To insist that he [Gaddafi] both leave the country and face trial in the International Criminal Court is virtually to ensure that he will stay in Libya to the bitter end and go down fighting”, the International Crisis Group observed (emphasis in original).35 That was precisely the idea:
A Chatham House paper published in June 2011 acknowledged that the goal was not to protect civilians or to formally depose Gaddafi but “to maintain the status quo for several months to come … to deplete the regime’s resources.”36 Once the country had been reduced to rubble (all the buildings in Sirte were damaged, for instance), the IMF and World Bank stepped in to reconstruct the country along Euro-American-approved lines.37
According to its own records, NATO launched 9,700 “strike sorties”: 6,300 were military, meaning that NATO hit 3,400 civilian targets.38 According to the UN’s human rights mission, on average 60 civilians died for every twenty strikes: approximately three civilians per strike.39 If we multiply 3 by 9,700 divided by 20, it can be estimated that 1,455 civilians died as a result of NATO strikes, added to the 1,300 who reportedly died in a single NATO attack.40
In total, NATO probably killed around 2,700 civilians by direct bombing (about the same number as NATO’s Serbian-Kosovar victims), and of course many more will die from the cancer and deformities caused by depleted uranium. In May 2011, Foreign Policy Journal’s Thomas C. Mountain reported that
NATO aircraft are routinely equipped with anti-armor missiles fitted with depleted uranium war heads. It has been widely reported that NATO has fired hundreds of anti-armor missiles in many parts of Libya, including in the immediate environs of the Libyan capital Tripoli. This means that thousands of kilos of depleted uranium have been used in Libya in the past weeks. … Irradiate the Libyan people to save the Libyan people? How else could you describe the NATO attack on Libya?41
On 30 April, Reuters reported that
Shattered glass litters the carpet at the Libyan Down’s Syndrome Society, and dust covers pictures of grinning children that adorn the hallway, thrown into darkness by a NATO strike … The force of the blast blew in windows and doors in the parent-funded school for children with Down’s Syndrome and officials said it damaged an orphanage on the floor above … Inside the school, the power had been knocked out by the strikes, the floor was wet because of a leaking pipe and desks were covered in glass and debris.
NATO offered no compensation. “Seddigh’s school prepared children with Down’s Syndrome up to the age of 6 to go to normal schools, giving them speech therapy, handicrafts and sports sessions and teaching them to read and write. It handles 50 to 60 children a day.”42
Referring to Misrata, Médecins Sans Frontières reported in June that “bombing continues nearby, producing scores of victims.” The rebels had no air force, and Gaddafi’s had been destroyed by April, according to UK military sources. That can only mean NATO bombs. “The months of [rebel] siege left behind massive destruction, including a central pharmacy that is now a pile of rubble.”43 Providing photographic evidence, Global Research correspondent Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya reported in June that
Tripoli’s Nasser University (Campus B of Al Fatah University) was bombed. University staff were injured and killed …. The unspoken objective is to destroy Libya’s economy and to prevent it from developing as a nation-state. This is why schools and universities, hospitals, shipyards, factories, not to mention residential areas, have been the target of NATO bombings.44
Also in June 2011, the noble and courageous Cynthia McKinney, ex-Congresswoman and former Green Party Presidential Candidate, reported back from a fact-finding mission in Libya that “NATO is preventing shipments of fuel, food and medicine to come in. There have been efforts to get medicine into the country that have been denied by NATO. It is impossible to go on any street and miss the huge queues”, she said. McKinney reported that “universities and other civilian facilities are being bombed by NATO.”45 In the video, McKinney’s fact-finder team is seen entering one hospital room after another, each with the injured and the doctor explaining how the injury occurred and showing the injuries. Houses are “completely destroyed” and meanwhile, according to McKinney, NATO has its own psychological operation in progress. “These bombs and missiles are not falling in empty spaces: people are all over Tripoli going about their lives just as in any other major metropolitan city of about two million people,” [she said].46
Russia’s state-owned Pravda reported that in July, NATO hit a water pipes factory in al-Brega, murdering six guards, this being the factory which makes pipes for the great man-made irrigation system across the desert which brings water to seventy per cent of Libyan homes … [NATO also] hit the pipeline factory producing pipes to repair it … Cameron, Obama and Sarkozy have the blood of hundreds of innocent people on their hands, the paper reported, failing to add that the Medvedev regime also have blood on their hands for not vetoing UNSCR 1973.47 In late August, UNICEF reported that “the country is facing a potentially disastrous water shortage … at risk of failing to meet the needs of the country’s almost 6 million people.”48On 2 September, UNICEF reported that “The disruption of the water supply to Tripoli through the country‘s ‘Great Man-Made River’ pipeline system has left approximately 4 million people without potable tap water.”49
On August 5, 2011, “NATO air missiles targeted a children’s hospital in Zlitan … killing 50 children. This event clearly reveals NATO war crimes and shows that civilians are being targeted during the bombing campaigns”, Global Research reported.50 AP reporter Paul Schemm noted in August that
The Libyan government showed foreign journalists … a destroyed flu clinic and food warehouses it said had been hit earlier in the day by NATO airstrikes, killing eight people … A nearby complex of food warehouses were also hit … and one was still burning when the journalists arrived. Each warehouse had a hole torn in the roof … “Is this the protection of civilians?” said local resident Rajab Sharaf, standing outside the burning building as the cinderblock walls buckled outward from the heat.51
Schemm was careful to use words like “allegedly” and “apparently” when reporting statements made by Gaddafi’s regime, but he used no such words in the uncritical reporting of UK Ministry of Defence officials who claimed that the RAF had struck only military targets: that was taken as gospel.
It appears that the US did the most to litter Libya with ordnance awaiting children’s limbs. “American warplanes from all services flew more than 5,350 sorties from April 1 through Aug. 23, according to statistics provided by the Pentagon. More than 1,200 of those were strike sorties, and 262 of those dropped ordnance on their missions”, the Air Force Times reported effusively. “When fighters from Libya’s rebel movement launched a battle to capture Tripoli on Aug. 20, NATO jets helped clear the path.”52
According to Pentagon spokesman George Little, the US also bombed Libya with 145 drone strikes—52 of which bombed Tripoli after Gaddafi had been overthrown.53
Aside from the destruction waged by the proxy militias, the UK directly contributed to the massive civilian toll: The Daily Mail noted “British jets carrying out bombing and strafing runs.”54 If Gaddafi had only limited military capabilities, as numerous Western military sources confirmed,55what exactly were British bombers strafing?
This also contradicts the “precision bombing” nonsense reported in other media. UK “troops on the ground”—a violation of UNSCRs 1970 and 1973—“use a process called ‘painting a target’ to pinpoint a site to be attacked. A laser beam from a portable device is bounced off a building or military installation from a few hundred yards,” before the target is bombed. It is easy to imagine the kind of mistakes that can be made using this process, and to imagine psychopathic soldiers wanting to have a little “fun.”56
By 31 August, the Western-installed puppet regime estimated that some 50,000 people had been killed. The devastating news was given 133 words by the Independent’s propagandist Kim Sengupta.57 As further evidence that NATO targeted civilians, Hillary Clinton mentioned in September efforts to “provide housing for Libyans who have been bombed out or had their homes destroyed.”58 If Gaddafi had no air force by April, who “bombed out” the civilians? In September, it was also reported that the British Royal Navy had been engaging in “psychological operations.”59
By November, much of the country had been wrecked. In Sirte, just 25% of the residents had returned. Red Cross delegate Charlotte Bennborn reported that “There is still a lack of clean water, electricity is limited and infrastructure has been badly damaged.” The returnees were living on monthly food rations given by the Red Cross, and receiving blankets and jerrycans in order survive in their “badly damaged houses.”60
A year after the bombing, the town of Al Qubah “had spent three months without an adequate or regular supply of potable water,” reported the Red Cross’s Sari Nasreddin. “The water network stopped functioning because no maintenance was performed on the original pumps during the conflict”, namely because NATO bombed the pipe factories. People were relying on water-trucking services, which were not able to supply enough water for all those in need.”61 A year after the bombing, Amnesty released a report:
scores of Libyan civilians who did not directly participate in hostilities were killed and many more injured as a result of NATO strikes. Regrettably more than four months since the end of the military campaign, NATO has yet to address these incidents appropriately, including by establishing contact and providing information to the victims and their relatives about any investigation which might have been initiated.
Amnesty’s limited mission recorded at least 115 civilians killed by NATO air strikes. Perhaps the depths of human suffering caused by the coup and bombing were most tragically articulated by Mustafa Naji al-Morabit, quoted in the Amnesty report:
My family has been destroyed; I lost my two little boys and my wife, Ibtisam, who was also my best friend. It is really difficult to go on, to get up every day and face life; I tell myself that I must find the strength for my son, the only child I have left. He can’t forget the horror of that day, when his mum and his little brothers were blown to bits. How can I help him to overcome this trauma? I myself can’t cope and there is no one to turn to. No one from NATO or from the authorities has got in touch to ask what happened or to offer any explanation or even one word of apology. We are living a miserable life; we have nothing left, our home and everything in it were destroyed.62
Thursday
Should Saif Gaddafi's face the "Free Libya" justice? 3rd Report of the prosecutor of the ICC to UNSC pursuant to UNSCR 1970
INTRODUCTION
1. On 26 February 2011 the United Nations Security Council unanimously adopted
Resolution 1970 (2011), referring the situation in Libya since 15 February 2011 to the
Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court and invited the Prosecutor to address the
Security Council on actions taken pursuant to this resolution.
2. In its first report, presented to the Council on 4 May 2011, the Office announced that it
would “submit its first application for an arrest warrant to Pre‐?Trial Chamber I in the next
weeks” and that it would “focus on those most responsible for crimes against humanity in the
territory of Libya since 15 February 2011.”
3. In its second report, on 2 November 2011, the Office reported that on 16 May 2011, the
Office had requested arrest warrants against three individuals who, according to the
evidence, were most responsible for the attacks against unarmed civilians on the streets
and in their houses in Benghazi, Tripoli and elsewhere during the month of February
2011. On 27 June 2011, the Judges of Pre‐Trial Chamber I issued warrants of arrest for
Muammar Gaddafi, Saif Al‐Islam Gaddafi, and Abdullah Al‐Senussi for murders as a
crime against humanity under article 7(1)(a) and persecution as a crime against
humanity under article 7(1)(h). The Chamber found that the crimes of murder and
persecution on political grounds were committed in the context of an attack against a
civilian population and in furtherance of a State policy that sought to quell and deter the
demonstrations by all means, including through the use of lethal force. Further, the
Chamber found that “the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor provides reasonable grounds to
believe that the scale of the concerted actions by Muammar Gaddafi and his son Saif Al‐Islam
Gaddafi leads to the inference that Muammar Gaddafi in coordination with his inner circle
including Saif Al‐Islam, conceived and orchestrated a plan to deter and quell, by all means, the
civilian demonstrations against the regime.”
4. This third report will address:
a. Cooperation;
b. The case of Muammar Mohammed Abu Minyar Gaddafi (Muammar
Gaddafi), Saif Al‐Islam Gaddafi, and Abdullah Al‐Senussi, including its
admissibility;
c. The ongoing second investigation;
d. A comprehensive report on the crimes allegedly committed by the
different parties in Libya since 15 February 2011.1. COOPERATION
5. Paragraph 5 of UNSCR 1970 (2011) “urges all States and concerned regional and other international
organizations to cooperate fully with the Court and the Prosecutor.” Insofar as States Parties to the
Rome Statute are concerned, the Statute provides an existing framework of obligations in
accordance with Part IX of the Statute.
6. The Office continues to receive cooperation from both States Parties and non‐States
Parties alike, as well as from the UN, Interpol, NGOs and other organizations. The
Office has submitted more than 86 requests for assistance during the investigation thus
far, many of which have been fulfilled or are in the process of being fulfilled,
representing approximately 85% of all requests made.
1.1 The UN Commission of Inquiry
7. The Office has a specific mandate in accordance with article 54 of the Statute “to establish
the truth, extend the investigation to cover all facts and evidence relevant to an assessment of
whether there is criminal responsibility under this Statute, and, in doing so, investigate
incriminating and exonerating circumstances equally.” It has the duty to carry out its own
investigation independently and to evaluate independently all information it receives
from non‐governmental, state or international bodies; in this context, it is appreciative of
the information received from the UN Commission of Inquiry.
8. The Office has taken cognizance of the latest report of the Commission of Inquiry, dated
2 March 2012 and of its findings in assessing possible next steps in the Office’s own
investigations.
9. The Office looks forward to continued cooperation and coordination with the Office of
the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, following on the work of the
Commission.
1.2 The Government of Libya
10. Security Council Resolution 1970 “Decides that the Libyan authorities shall cooperate fully
with and provide any necessary assistance to the Court and the Prosecutor pursuant to this
resolution.”
11. The Office appreciates its ongoing cooperation with the Government of Libya in this
regard. Since 2 November 2011, the Office has sent several investigative missions to
Libya, and the intensity of cooperation with the OTP’s investigations is only increasing.
12. From 18 to 20 April, the Prosecutor led a mission to Libya and held meetings with
National Transitional Council (NTC) Chairman Mustafa Abdul Jalil, with Prime Minister
Abdulrahim Al Keib, with Justice Minister Ali Hemda Ashour, with Attorney‐General
Abdulaziz Al Hasadi, with Foreign Minister Ashoura Bin Khayalle and Deputy Foreign
Minister Mohamed Abdulaziz, with Interior Minister Faouzi Abdel Aal, and with a
number of other government officials and members of the National Transitional Council.
Page : 2 / 1013. In these meetings, all concerned expressed gratitude for the Court’s intervention in
Libya at the height of the violence and how the issuance of arrest warrants strengthened
the Libyan people’s resolve to stop Gaddafi’s crimes; they reiterated their support for
the ICC and their interest to work cooperatively together to ensure justice for victims.
While the Court’s intervention was seen as necessary and timely given that there were
no prospects for justice under Gaddafi’s regime, the national authorities stressed their
intent to conduct fair and impartial national investigations and prosecutions of Saif Al‐
Islam Gaddafi and Abdullah Al‐Senussi that meet international standards and that, in
their analysis, would satisfy the admissibility requirements of the Rome Statute.
2. THE CASE OF MUAMMAR MOHAMMED ABU MINYAR GADDAFI
(MUAMMAR GADDAFI), SAIF AL‐ISLAM GADDAFI, AND ABDULLAH AL‐
SENUSSI
14. Since the last report, Pre‐Trial Chamber I terminated the case against Muammar Gaddafi
on 22 November 2011. Saif Al‐Islam Gaddafi was arrested on 19 November 2011 in
Zintan, in Libya, and has remained in custody in Zintan. Abdullah Al‐Senussi was
arrested on 17 March 2012 in Mauritania and remains in custody in Mauritania, pending
national extradition requests from Libya and France and the request of the International
Criminal Court to surrender him.
15. On 6 December 2011, the Chamber issued the ʺPublic Redacted Version of Decision
Requesting Libya to file Observations Regarding the Arrest of Saif Al‐Islam Gaddafiʺ.
In this decision, the Chamber, inter alia, sought submissions from Libya on whether and
when the Libyan authorities intended to surrender Mr Gaddafi to the Court. The Libyan
authorities confidentially filed their response on 23 January 2012, in which they, inter
alia¸ sought to postpone Saif Al‐Islam Gaddafi’s surrender in order for the Government
of Libya to complete its investigation and prosecution. On 3 February 2012, the Chamber
issued the ʺDecision on the Registry‐OPCD Visit to Libyaʺ, ordering the Registry to
make arrangements with the NTC for a joint Registry‐OPCD visit to Mr. Gaddafi in
Libya. The Registry‐OPCD delegation visited Libya from 29 February 2012 to 4 March
2012, and a visit to Mr. Gaddafi by part of this delegation occurred on 3 March 2012.
The OPCD filed confidential reports on 4 and 5 March regarding this visit, which have
since been released in public redacted versions.
16. On 7 March, the Pre‐Trial Chamber refused the Libyan request to postpone the
surrender of Saif Al‐Islam Gaddafi, considering that article 94(1), invoked by the
Libyans, did not provide a basis for postponement of the surrender, and requested that
Libya arrange with the Registry for Saif Al‐Islam Gaddafi’s surrender to the Court.
On 22 March 2012, the Government of Libya notified the Pre‐Trial Chamber of its
intention to challenge the admissibility of Saif Al‐Islam Gaddafi’s case pursuant to
articles 19(2)(b), (5) and (6) of the Rome Statute by 30 April 2012 and asked for the
suspension of the surrender request pending a decision on this challenge. On 4 April
2012, the Pre‐Trial Chamber issued a second decision, recalling that postponement of the
surrender request under article 95 could only be invoked when there was an actual
admissibility challenge under consideration, and for this reason, rejected the second
Page : 3 / 10postponement request and reiterated its request that Libya surrender Saif Al‐Islam
Gaddafi immediately to the Court.
2.1 Admissibility of the Case Against Saif Al‐Islam Gaddafi
17. On 1 May, the Government of Libya publicly filed an admissibility challenge in the case
of Saif Al‐Islam Gaddafi, arguing that it is investigating him for the same and additional
crimes and the same underlying conduct as the Office of the Prosecutor. The
Government of Libya submitted in its application under article 19(2)(b) of the Rome
Statute that “this case is inadmissible on the grounds that its national judicial system is actively
investigating Mr Gaddafi and Mr Al‐Senussi for their alleged criminal responsibility for multiple acts
of murder and persecution, committed pursuant to or in furtherance of State policy, amounting to
crimes against humanity. These acts, allegedly committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack
against Libyan civilians, include but are not limited to crimes committed in Tripoli, Benghazi, and
Misrata, during the period commencing from 15 February 2011 until the liberation of Libya.”
18. The application submits that “The Libyan Government has expended considerable efforts to ensure
an effective and genuine investigation of both of these individuals in the expectation of being able to
conduct fair trials for them in Libya.” The application adds that “the Libyan Government has no
intention of shielding such individuals so as to allow impunity, or to hold a rushed trial of these two
persons that would not meet international minimum standards of due process. It is committed to
attaining the highest international standards both for the conduct of its investigations and any eventual
trials.”
19. The application notes that “On 8 January 2012, the Libyan Prosecutor‐General commenced an
investigation of serious crimes (including murder and rape) allegedly committed by Mr Gaddafi during
the 2011 revolution (including in the period between 15 February to 28 February 2011). A similar
investigation in respect of Mr Al‐Senussi by the Libyan Military Prosecutor was commenced on
3 April 2012. These investigations have continued and are now at an advanced stage. They are expected
to be completed in the near future.”
20. According to the application, the Libyan Code of Criminal Procedure, based on the
Italian model, provides four phases of criminal proceedings: investigation, accusation
(similar to the ICC’s confirmation of charges), trial and appeal. Article 59 of Libya’s
Criminal Procedure Code requires confidentiality, allowing only the disclosure of
summary reports to persons not involved in the Libyan investigative or prosecutorial
team. For this reason, the Government of Libya confidentially provides the Pre‐Trial
Chamber summary reports of its evidence against Saif Al‐Islam Gaddafi, but indicates
that with the completion of the investigative phase of proceedings in the next few
weeks, it would be in a position to provide on a confidential basis examples of the
evidence that will be relied upon in the accusation, trial and appeals phases of the case.
21. The application notes that the Libyan authorities have analyzed intercept evidence of
the speeches and telephone calls of Saif Al‐Islam Gaddafi from February 2011 forward,
and have conducted interviews with potential witnesses with first‐hand knowledge of
the crimes alleged, including friends and associates of Saif Al‐Islam Gaddafi, members
of the Libyan military, “volunteers” who were not members of the military but were
Page : 4 / 10armed directly by Saif Al‐Islam Gaddafi, and civilians who did not take part in the
fighting, such as family members of victims. The application notes that the Prosecutor‐
General and his team will conduct further interviews, and will continue with the
collation and analysis of photographs and other evidence, and will prepare full
transcripts of the intercept evidence in their possession. Documentary evidence includes
passenger manifests and payments records for the transport of mercenaries in Afriqiyah
Airways.
22. Libyan authorities expect to proceed to the accusation stage of proceedings (similar to
the ICC’s confirmation of charges) in the next few weeks, and if that stage succeeds, to
proceed to trial.
23. As regards Saif Al‐Islam Gaddafi’s detention, the application asserts that the original
detention period was extended on the authority of the Prosecutor General, after being
issued with permission to do so by a summary judge who travelled to Zintan for this
purpose, and that Saif Al‐Islam Gaddafi has been kept in adequate conditions of
detention, provided with sufficient and good quality food, given access to ICC lawyers
and the option of retaining a domestic lawyer of his choosing, received visits from
NGOs and family members, been provided with proper medical and dental care and not
subject to physical abuse, and investigated under Libyan law with respect to the same
crimes for which the ICC Office of the Prosecutor has investigated him.
24. The Office is studying this filing and will soon submit its observations to the Pre‐Trial
Chamber. As mentioned on numerous occasions in relation to the Darfur and other
situations, under the Statute, admissibility analysis is not an assessment of the judicial
system as a whole, but an assessment as to whether or not the national authorities have
investigated or prosecuted, or are investigating or prosecuting genuinely, the cases
selected by the Office.
25. In its 4 May “Decision on the Conduct of the Proceedings Following the ʹApplication on
behalf of the Government of Libya pursuant to Article 19 of the Statuteʹ,” the Pre‐Trial
Chamber ruled as a preliminary matter that, on the basis of Libya’s submissions, it
understood the challenge to concern only the case against Saif Al‐Islam Gaddafi, and not
Abdullah Al‐Senussi.
26. In addition to requesting observations from the OTP, as well as from the Offices of
Public Counsel for the Defence and for the Victims, the Pre‐Trial Chamber furthermore
followed the procedure outlined, in its 4 May “Decision on the Conduct of the
Proceedings Following the ʹApplication on behalf of the Government of Libya pursuant
to Article 19 of the Statuteʹ,” Rule 59 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, which
provides:
For the purpose of article 19, paragraph 3, the Registrar shall inform the following of
any question or challenge of jurisdiction or admissibility which has arisen pursuant to
article 19, paragraphs 1, 2 and 3:
(a) Those who have referred a situation pursuant to article 13;
Page : 5 / 10(b) The victims who have already communicated with the Court in relation to that case
or their legal representatives.
1
27. In relation to Libya, the body that referred the situation is the Security Council and
accordingly must be notified. The Rule further provides that those so informed “may
make representation in writing to the competent Chamber within such time limit as it considers
appropriate.” As such, the Court directed the Registrar to inform the Security Council of
the challenge and invited the Security Council to submit observations on the challenge,
if any, by 4 June 2012.
28. It is therefore for the Security Council to decide whether it wishes to submit any
observations to the Court on the specific challenge brought. The Prosecutor, as a party to
the proceedings, cannot provide any further comments in this regard.
29. It will be for the Judges of the Pre‐Trial Chamber to decide whether the case remains
admissible before the ICC.
30. The admissibility challenge in relation to Saif Al‐Islam Gaddafi has suspended the
Office’s investigations into Saif Al‐Islam Gaddafi’s activities, pursuant to the
requirements of article 19(7).
31. Al‐Senussi remains in detention in Mauritania, pending consideration of extradition
requests from Libya and France and of the request for surrender from the International
Criminal Court. As the 1 May Libyan application has noted, Al‐Senussi “is not currently
subject to any control by or contact on behalf of the Libyan authorities. Nevertheless, the investigation
of his involvement in alleged crimes is proceeding with due commitment. As noted above, Mr Al‐
Senussi was a member of the Libyan armed forces at the relevant time. Accordingly, as is required by
the applicable regulations of Libyan law, his investigation is being conducted by the Military
Prosecutor and not by the Prosecutor‐General. The Military Prosecutor commenced his investigation of
Mr Al‐Senussi in relation to allegations of both financial crimes and crimes against the person on
3 April 2012, following a Libyan delegation visit to Mauritania on 20 March 2012.”
2.2 The Ongoing Investigation
Gender crimes
32. The Office has proceeded with the investigation of a second case in relation to gender
crimes that includes collection of evidence against other possible suspects outside Libya.
33. The Commission of Inquiry interviewed a number of victims and perpetrators and
determined that sexual violence took place in Libya during the period of 15 February
until the end of the conflict. It found that there were two primary patterns of rapes that
targeted both men and women. One pattern identified involved the rape of victims by
numerous armed men either in their homes or elsewhere. A second pattern identified
involved the rapes of victims in detention as punishment or to extract information.
1
Rule 59(1), Rules of Procedure and Evidence (emphasis added).
Page : 6 / 1034. As noted in its 2 November 2011 briefing, the Office is mindful that in Libya, rape is
considered to be one of the most serious crimes, affecting the victim in many ways
including in their relation to family and society. Accordingly, the Office has adopted a
strategy which seeks to limit the exposure of victims by focusing on obtaining alternate
evidence and identifying avenues of investigation which support charges without the
need for multiple victim statements. In this respect, the Office has been in contact with
sources reporting multiple victims of sexual violence, allegedly committed by Gaddafi
security forces, including doctors and nurses who treated the victims. Additionally, the
Office is collecting evidence from members of Gaddafi forces.
35. The Office continues to collect evidence.
3. COMPREHENSIVE REPORT ON THE CRIMES ALLEGEDLY COMMITTED BY
THE DIFFERENT PARTIES IN LIBYA SINCE 15 FEBRUARY 2011
36. The High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, commented in her 25 January
2012 briefing to the UN Security Council that “In addition to addressing ongoing human
rights concerns, Libyans are faced with the enormous challenge of addressing past abuses. Those
include violations committed during the former regime, as well as violations of international
human rights and international humanitarian law committed during the conflict.”
37. The UN Commission of Inquiry documented thousands of alleged crimes committed by
Gaddafi forces, as well as allegations of crimes committed by rebel or revolutionary
forces.
38. Government of Libya officials also discussed with the Office their preparations of a
comprehensive strategy to address all crimes and end impunity in Libya.
39. Among the critical tasks facing the Government of Libya is arranging the transfer of
control of thousands of detainees from militias and local authorities to the national
authorities, and the screening of these detainees to determine as quickly as possible who
must be released, and who will be the subject of criminal investigations and possible
prosecutions. This has also been identified as a major concern by the High
Commissioner for Human Rights.
40. The Office understands that the Libyan comprehensive strategy to deal with the massive
number of crimes committed in the Libya territory includes criminal investigations and
prosecutions of those who bear the greatest responsibility for the most serious crimes. In
particular, in accordance with article 8 of the Rome Statute, this includes war crimes
committed as part of a plan or policy or as part of a large‐scale commission of such
crimes.
41. The Government of Libya has recently adopted a Transitional Justice Law, which,
among other things, establishes a Fact‐Finding and Reconciliation Commission. The
Office understands that the Government is in the process of establishing the
Commission, and that its work has not yet begun, but that the Government is working
Page : 7 / 10with the UN on its establishment. The Office encourages these and other complementary
efforts to address justice.
42. The office is focused in particular on:
Arbitrary arrests and detention and enforced disappearances
43. The Commission of Inquiry found that rebel or revolutionary forces were involved in
arbitrary arrests and enforced disappearance of perceived Gaddafi loyalists, security
officers and members of the former government. The Commission expressed concern
that rebel or revolutionary forces had applied the presumption of guilt to those who
fought against them or who were believed to have supported the Gaddafi Government,
and that detainees were being held outside the legal framework, rendering their
detention arbitrary.
44. The Commission acknowledged that recent statements by the Government of Libya
indicated that the new authorities recognized the concern and were taking steps to
address it, following the attention the UN and both national and international NGOs
brought to this issue. Nevertheless, the Commission noted that torture was still taking
place in centers under the control of local military councils and security committees, that
access to family members remained limited, and that access to lawyers was non‐existent.
45. According to information received in February 2012, the Commission reported that
approximately eight of sixty detention facilities across Libya were now under the control
of the National Transitional Council. The Government of Libya appeared to be making
some headway in extending its control over the known detention centers, with an
additional 1523 detainees in three detention centers in Misrata reportedly handed over
to Government of Libya control during the Prosecutor’s visit to Tripoli in April 2012.
The Government of Libya stated to the Commission its commitment to close all
unofficial and unacknowledged detention centers as quickly as possible and to take
steps to curb maltreatment.
46. During the 18 to 20 April visit of the Prosecutor, the Government of Libya indicated that
thousands of detainees were turned over that week to national control, but
acknowledged that many more remain to be processed, and that this was an essential
first task in re‐establishing the rule of law in Libya. The Office has reminded the Libyan
authorities of the importance of ensuring due process for those detained and it has been
informed that the NTC is working to ensure that all formal and informal detention
facilities created during the past year are brought under formal Government of Libya
control, to undertake the screening of all detainees and to ensure that those against
whom there is no basis for investigation are released.
Tawergha civilians
47. Human Rights organizations have raised concerns about the situation in Tawergha, a
town near Misrata. In its 8 April 2012 letter to the Misrata Local Council and the Misrata
Military Council, Human Rights Watch alleges that civilians were subject to killings,
Page : 8 / 10looting, property destruction and forced displacement by the Misrata militias, and that
Misrata militias are preventing Tawergha civilians from returning to their homes.
48. In its 2 March 2012 report, the UN Commission of Inquiry noted that Misratans believed
Tawerghans to be Gaddafi loyalists and responsible for crimes, including rape. The
Commission reported that once the rebel or revolutionary forces took control of Misrata
and ended the siege, they shelled Tawergha from 10 to 12 August 2011, using
indiscriminate munitions, killing and injuring civilians, and shot at Tawerghans as they
left the town, killing and injuring civilians.
49. The Commission found that following the capture of Tripoli, there were arbitrary arrests
of Tawerghans by Misratan militias and that, according to reports, those detained were
subject to torture or mistreatment. In the months following the displacement of the
population of Tawergha, houses and buildings continued to be looted and destroyed,
Misratan rebel or revolutionary forces used racist or derogatory language to describe
Tawerghans, and expressed the intent that the Tawerghans never return.
50. The Commission concluded that murder, torture and cruel treatment, and pillaging
could constitute war crimes, or in peacetime, could violate international human rights
law, and that torture, given the widespread and systematic manner, could constitute
crimes against humanity. The Commission noted that other communities were similarly
targeted, including Mashashiya towns perceived as loyalist.
NATO
51. The UN Commission of Inquiry found in its 2 March 2012 report that NATO did not
deliberately target civilians in Libya, and that for the few targets struck within
population centers, NATO took extensive precautions to ensure civilians were not killed.
52. Of a total of 25,944 air sorties and 7,642 air‐to‐surface weapons employed as reported by
NATO, with respect to five air strikes the Commission cited evidence suggesting that a
total of 60 civilians were killed and 55 injured. The Commission also examined two
NATO air strikes which damaged civilian infrastructure and where it could not confirm
NATOʹs assertion that the strikes had been directed at legitimate military targets. The
Commission concluded that it was unable to determine whether these air strikes were
based on incorrect or outdated intelligence, for lack of sufficient information from
NATO. The Commission called on NATO as well as the Libyan authorities to conduct
investigations in Libya to determine the level of civilian casualties, and review how their
procedures operated during Operation Unified Protector.
53. The Office does not have jurisdiction to assess the legality of the use of force and
evaluate the proper scope of NATO’s mandate in relation to UNSC Resolution 1973.
54. The Office does have a mandate, however, to investigate allegations of crimes by all
actors. This includes allegations of crimes against humanity (article 7 of the Statute) and
of war crimes, in particular when committed as part of a plan or policy or as part of
large scale commission of such crimes (article 8 of the Statute).
Page : 9 / 10Page : 10 / 10
55. The Office has found no information to conclude that the NATO air strikes which may
have resulted in civilian death and injury or damaged civilian objects were the result of
the intentionally directing of attacks against the civilian population as such or against
civilian objects. The Office has therefore focused its attention on incidental loss of life or
injury to civilians under article 8(2)(b)(iv).
56. In relation to the overall direction of Operation Unified Protector (OUP) exercised by
NATO’s supreme decision‐making authority, the North Atlantic Council, the Office has
no information to suggest that the North Atlantic Council authorized the launching of
strikes in the knowledge that such attacks would cause incidental loss of life or injury to
civilians or damage to civilian objects which would be clearly excessive in relation to the
concrete and direct overall military advantage anticipated.
57. The Office is also unaware of information suggesting that such strikes were directed at
the level of the overall direction of the operation, in particular the Combined Joint Task
Force Command OUP which operationally commanded OUP and its tactical air
operations.
58. In examining such allegations, the Office is also assessing the existence of genuine
national proceedings as well as considerations of gravity. The Office understands that
the Government of Libya has committed to further investigate the five incidents
identified by the UN Commission of Inquiry, and that the individual States involved in
these operations further have the responsibility to investigate whether their own forces
were potentially involved through negligence or otherwise in criminal activities. The
Office will monitor these proceedings to assess whether the Office should conduct its
own investigations.
4. CONCLUSION
59. Two arrest warrants against Saif Al‐Islam Gaddafi and Abdallah Al‐Senussi are
outstanding.
60. Mauritania received a surrender request from the Court against Al‐Senussi.
61. Libya has made a challenge to admissibility. Under the Rome Statute, admissibility
analysis is not an assessment of the judicial system as a whole, but an assessment as to
whether or not the national authorities have investigated or prosecuted, or are
investigating or prosecuting genuinely the cases selected by the Office.
62. The Office of the Prosecutor plans to continue its ongoing investigation and to continue
its evaluation of Libya’s efforts in order to ensure that justice is done in Libya.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)