PDA

View Full Version : International Court for ISIS fighters?


Mechta
10th Feb 2018, 14:19
Is this to give the British ISIS fighters the justice they deserve, or a gravy train for highly paid lawyers to suck money away from more deserving destinations?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/feb/09/victims-relatives-welcome-capture-of-british-isis-fighters-the-beatles

hiflymk3
10th Feb 2018, 15:24
String 'em up, I say.

But no, we are a civilized society and they should have a fair trial.

Then sting 'em up.

VP959
10th Feb 2018, 15:25
Personally I'm not convinced that any justice system is really equipped to deal with crimes of this magnitude, and that includes the ICJ in the Hague.

The evidence needs to be heard by a court that can properly weigh it and determine guilt or innocence, but also one that can impose a sentence upon those found guilty that is appropriate to their crime.

I'm not a supporter of the death penalty, but neither am I a supporter of any system that makes a prison sentence too comfortable. In the case of those who have gone to fight for IS, based on their firmly held belief that their distorted version of Islam should be the only true world religion, and that all who don't convert to it shall be killed, then I cant see any real prospect of rehabilitation. If someone is susceptible to radicalisation, then I believe that there is a very good chance that they will remain susceptible to it for life, no matter how much they say otherwise in the hope of early release.

If found guilty, then their sentence needs to be tough, as in this case I believe that the punishment element of the sentence has to be very high, greater than the need to keep society safe from them by locking them up.

The question really comes down to which jurisdiction is able to provide an acceptably humane form of imprisonment that includes an adequate degree of punishment for what are alleged to be pretty horrific crimes.

galaxy flyer
10th Feb 2018, 15:47
Skipping to Godwin’s Law, how would they have been handled in 1944? I suspect Churchill would have insisted on “against the wall”.

GF

Bergerie1
10th Feb 2018, 15:52
VP 959,

I'm not a supporter of the death penalty either but, in this case, I think 'galaxy flyer' is probably right.

VP959
10th Feb 2018, 16:11
The only advantages of the death penalty is that is cheap and quick.

I remain unconvinced that it is either an effective deterrent; in this case it may well make the individuals martyrs, and so act to encourage MORE people like them. Neither am I convinced that it would be seen as punishment by those found guilty of crimes like this, they would probably look at it as a quick way to get their promised reward from their god.

Incarceration in a fair, but harsh, prison environment, seems to me to be a more appropriate punishment, and probably a more effective deterrent. For one thing it provides a decades long reminder of what happens to those who commit crimes like this, whereas an execution will probably be forgotten about within a few weeks.

I find it curious that we are happy to impose community sentences that involve hundreds of hours of unpaid manual work, but that we are seemingly unwilling to introduce mandatory manual work as a part of a prison sentence. I'm not talking about going back to breaking rocks here, but forcing prisoners to work hard for their entire sentence.

MungoP
10th Feb 2018, 16:26
Pleeeease.. Give them to me for two days.. Anyone else can have what's left over.

glad rag
10th Feb 2018, 17:01
Up against a wall with a firing squad consisting of but not limited to lgbt activists, assorted snowflakes and a smattering of nuns.

That'll **** them up.

galaxy flyer
10th Feb 2018, 17:02
Nothing so concentrates the mind than the prospect of being hung in a fortnight. I really do thing even criminals and terrorists weigh the rewards and consequences of their acts. Death is very much a deterrent, as the many Nazis who choose suicide to hanging.

Con-pilot once told of a convicted murderer, who became a contract killer in the Federal penitentiary system. Convicted the second time, given the death penalty, choose “state’s evidence”; snitched on his employer and avoided the death penalty despite being a marked man.

GF

Gertrude the Wombat
10th Feb 2018, 17:02
Skipping to Godwin’s Law, how would they have been handled in 1944? I suspect Churchill would have insisted on “against the wall”.
We are richer now than we were then (well, until #brexit, anyway). Capital punishment is as much an economic as a moral argument - how much damage would the cost of locking them up for life do to the innocent people who have to pay that cost, and can we afford it?

RatherBeFlying
10th Feb 2018, 17:57
I'm sure the locals are motivated to see justice served.

The should receive at a very minimum the due process they offered accused when they were in charge:E

alwayzinit
10th Feb 2018, 19:11
The crimes this pair have, by and large, been committed against those in the region.
They should be tried ( and executed) by those who they hurt most.
It would appear that there is not any doubt about their actions.
I would argue that there are now more grounds to reinstate Capital Punishment than ever before, forensic science is hugely advanced combined with DNA and other sources of evidence.
If not actual death, the imposition of a medical coma to remove all sensory inputs is a more "humane" option. It would also allow for appeals.

DaveReidUK
10th Feb 2018, 19:19
They should be tried (and executed) by those who they hurt most.

Victims are the last people who should try anyone.

meadowrun
10th Feb 2018, 19:19
Handle it (and all others) locally. No Hague, no Cuban holiday, no Bow Street magistrates court, no venue for spreading their propaganda, no added security issues, no added judicial or incarceration expenses.


What do you do with cancer?

ORAC
10th Feb 2018, 19:21
Is this to give the British ISIS fighters the justice they deserve Not British - stripped of their citizenship.

finfly1
10th Feb 2018, 19:23
Victims are the last people who should try anyone.

That sounds counter intuitive. Why so?

SARF
10th Feb 2018, 19:33
Go for the cheap option. Shoot them both with one bulllet

ORAC
10th Feb 2018, 19:40
That sounds counter intuitive. Why so? Because Justice is supposed to be dispassionate.

https://www.ancientsculpturegallery.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/0f396e8a55728e79b48334e699243c07/b/-/b-tk54007_2.jpg

DON T
10th Feb 2018, 19:41
Pity we missed Falcon Heavy, could have saved on the dummy and put them nearer their maker. ��

vapilot2004
10th Feb 2018, 21:03
I'm all for the rule of law, but this is war and ISIS fighters should be afforded the same courtesy as other enemy combatants, and be dispatched by whatever means necessary, be it carbon steel, lead, or high explosive rained down upon them from on high.

If captured by opposing forces, let the locals sort them out. If they have some intelligence value, by all means have a talk, but leave them fester in their own juices whenever possible.

SMT Member
10th Feb 2018, 21:50
Funny thing, suggesting criminals should tried anywhere else, but the place they committed the crime.

Were I, for instance, to murder a person abroad they won't send me home for trail and sentencing. It might be possible, after a while, to be transferred home to serve remainder of sentence, but that's about it.

So why suggest trying these individuals anywhere but Syria, Iraq, Turkey or wherever else they dig their caves?

racedo
10th Feb 2018, 22:41
Syrians don't seem to have many problems with Prisoners, they all fight to teh death is the story. seemingly the likes of US/UK/ Saudi/Qatar backed groups are quite happy to do their masters bidding.

Perhaps their masters should be the ones on trial.

VP959
10th Feb 2018, 22:42
I think that one problem is that at the times that some of these crimes were committed we don't know the jurisdiction. IS declared itself to be a state, and it's not 100% clear whether the crimes were committed in Syria or Iraq.

The arresting authority would seem to be the obvious choice, but with these guys being either British nationals (although I understand that may be unclear), ot stateless (which I believe to be the case) then someone has to decide where they should be tried.

Gertrude the Wombat
10th Feb 2018, 22:58
I think that one problem is that at the times that some of these crimes were committed we don't know the jurisdiction. IS declared itself to be a state, and it's not 100% clear whether the crimes were committed in Syria or Iraq.

The arresting authority would seem to be the obvious choice, but with these guys being either British nationals (although I understand that may be unclear), ot stateless (which I believe to be the case) then someone has to decide where they should be tried.
It helps if there's a plausible functioning judicial system in the place that's going to hold the trial, which rules out some of these locations.

Then there are extraterritorial laws that some states have, such as "you've broken one of our domestic laws if you kill one of our citizens anywhere in the world": one can argue about the validity of such laws, but the states concerned, at least, reckon they've got a right to do the trying.

But then there's how does the perp get from A to B? - by being kidnapped and taken to an offshore torture camp ... and then just kept there and never put in front of a court at all? Really good, that, in terms of reputational damage to the "good" side (getting someone to admit to the terrible crime of waterboarding by ... er ... waterboarding him would look really good, yes?), and this terrorism is, after all, at least in part a propaganda war.

Having wondered about suchlike things, one can begin to see where the idea of the ICC might have come from.

ImageGear
10th Feb 2018, 22:58
Victims are the last people who should try anyone.

Tell me which other person can ever feel the pain and anguish of the victim.

No lawyer, judge, jury, psychiatrist, rights advocate, politician, will ever convince the victims of how much they have suffered.

Who will be there for the Jordanian pilot's family?

Let the punishment fit the crime.

IG.

G-CPTN
10th Feb 2018, 23:01
An eye for an eye . . .

MungoP
11th Feb 2018, 05:17
Because Justice is supposed to be dispassionate.

One of those platitudes. It's that sort of attitude that leads to people giving more consideration to the criminals' welfare than that of the suffering victims.

PLovett
11th Feb 2018, 07:14
One of those platitudes. It's that sort of attitude that leads to people giving more consideration to the criminals' welfare than that of the suffering victims.

It is most definitely not a platitude. And the rest of your comment is rubbish as well. Like most comments of a similar kind it stems from ignorance.

SOPS
11th Feb 2018, 08:20
Pity we missed Falcon Heavy, could have saved on the dummy and put them nearer their maker. ��

I vote for this idea...maybe on the next launch!!

ZFT
11th Feb 2018, 10:39
Cherie Blair will not miss this opportunity to defend them!

mutt
11th Feb 2018, 12:34
They want to live under Islamic law, so let them attend an Islamic court, the sentence would be based on an eye for an eye, so it would involve a sword rather than a bullet.

Dan Gerous
11th Feb 2018, 12:39
If you want to punish them and make them suffer,put them in jail, single cell, the smallest legally allowed, no human contact and a copy of their book to keep them company for the rest of their lives. The death penalty is too easy an option for them.

DaveReidUK
11th Feb 2018, 13:23
Cherie Blair will not miss this opportunity to defend them!

If you believe they are entitled to a fair trial, there is absolutely no reason why she shouldn't defend them.

If you don't, there is even more reason why she should do so.

MungoP
11th Feb 2018, 21:53
DaveReidUK
Defending them is not the issue.. it's the punishment we're more concerned with. We don't need these Ar*soles enjoying life at the UK taxpayers expense. Ideally we should let them be dealt with by their captors.

Mr Oleo Strut
11th Feb 2018, 22:34
Tried, and when found guilty, solitary confinement for the rest of their lives. No remission, no concessions, no visits, no outside contact, no hope. Just four blank walls and the prospect of a slow and lingering death.

Ascend Charlie
12th Feb 2018, 00:27
Toss them into a big pen full of hungry pigs.

DANbudgieman
12th Feb 2018, 03:21
Everyone seems to have missed the point that theses two ne'er do wells are presently in the custody of Kurdish irregular forces.

Putting them on trial assumes that the fore mentioned Kurds have any interest in handing them over to anyone.

The Kurds will be fully aware of their past treatment of fellow Kurds. Are they likely to hand them over to whoever so that they could then can enjoy the rest of their lives in a comfortable jail?

I suspect that their near term fate is likely to be rather more terminal. There shall be few voices seeking clemency, apart from the usual suspects. Either way, few shall miss them.

fitliker
12th Feb 2018, 04:20
Idi Amin's hammer squads would have no problem sleeping after getting all their angst out on people less deserving of the 20 oz ball pin hammer spa treatments, than these illegal irregulars .
What do the Geneva conventions say about dealing with irregular murdering rapists ?
Feet first in the wood chipper might be too quick and kind for them to achieve true martyrdom status .
"Death by Bongo " might be more of a deterant to others who might to follow their cause in the future.

ZFT
12th Feb 2018, 06:10
If you believe they are entitled to a fair trial, there is absolutely no reason why she shouldn't defend them.

If you don't, there is even more reason why she should do so.

Damned if I do, damned if I don't!

VP959
12th Feb 2018, 08:02
If we are to place ourselves, as a society, in a position where we maintain the moral high ground, then no matter how heinous the crime, we must adhere to our principles and conduct a fair trial, complete with the presumption of innocence.

Those calling for summary execution by barbaric methods are lowering themselves to the same level as those they accuse of these atrocities, which then gives more reason for those who hate the way we live to continue to take action against us.

We may well have reason to believe, from what has been reported by the media, that these men are criminals, but under our laws, at the moment, they are innocent until proven otherwise. There may well be more than enough evidence for their arrest and for charges to be brought, but deciding on a sentence needs to be done after all the evidence has been heard and a verdict reached that they are guilty.

To believe a man guilty and then just execute him, with no trial, makes us as morally corrupt as we may believe him to be.

MungoP
12th Feb 2018, 08:23
VP959

I'd have no problem with that.. provided that the sentence would include being Hung, Drawn and Quartered as opposed to costing the tax-payers a phenomenal sum every year for the rest of their comfortable lives, regular visits from social workers concerned with their welfare and 'human' rights that they in the opinion of many have forfeited by their sub-human behaviour.

galaxy flyer
12th Feb 2018, 15:43
ISIS and the lot of them declared war on us. They can either fight by the established laws of war, be defeated, surrender and be tried for crimes against humanity and war crimes. Or they can continue to be treated as those under the laws of war would be. POW status until the end of the conflict. Violate the laws of war defining combatants and summary execution has a long proven record. What’s changed since German soldiers, posing as allies, were treated as spies and shot is our own lack of moral clarity.

GF

meadowrun
12th Feb 2018, 17:11
What's changed?


Any formalities, no treaties, no backroom agreements on rules of conflict, just vicious, merciless, no holds barred combat evidenced by the terrorist organizations.


There are no rules now for some combatant groups in this world -
the only one might be "fight fire with fire".

galaxy flyer
12th Feb 2018, 19:20
We should force them into following the rules established thru ages of combat, most of it on Flanders fields, I might note. The penalties for violating them means forfeiting their protections. They want to fight us without mercy; then turn our laws against us when caught out. Well, they forfeited the protections, so reap the whirlwind.

GF

Fareastdriver
12th Feb 2018, 21:21
Tried, and when found guilty, solitary confinement for the rest of their lives. No remission, no concessions, no visits, no outside contact, no hope. Just four blank walls and the prospect of a slow and lingering death.

Why should anybody pay?

ORAC
17th Feb 2018, 07:40
200 Isis fighters who came from UK cannot return (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/200-isis-fighters-who-came-from-uk-cannot-return-wrg8lvpjd)

Two thirds of Islamic State fighters who travelled from Britain and are still in Syria or Iraq will be prevented from returning home.

Neil Basu, the senior national coordinator for counterterrorism policing, said exclusion powers would be applied to about 200 of the 300 fighters in the war zone because “we operate on the principle that we don’t want you back”. The 200 are thought to be dual nationals who can be stripped of their citizenship or foreign citizens who previously resided here but did not have British nationality.

Mr Basu, a deputy assistant commissioner at Scotland Yard, said that the remaining 100, who are sole UK citizens and cannot be made stateless, may try to come back but the authorities were waiting for them. They can be charged with criminal offences or given movement restrictions and made to go into counterextremism programmes......

The Home Office has refused to make public the number of remaining fighters who have had their British citizenship removed. Under a power without judicial oversight, Amber Rudd, the home secretary, can deprive someone of citizenship if she is satisfied it is “conducive to the public good”, such as for national security. The person must have dual nationality or the authorities must have a reasonable belief they could get citizenship of another state.....

Another tool that can prevent the imminent return of jihadists is the royal prerogative, which enables cancellation of passports. Deprivation of citizenship orders were made 36 times for the “public good” between 2006 and 2015......

CISTRS
17th Feb 2018, 08:17
They should be given the opportunity of taking up a career in organ donation.