you. take. your wedding with all of the wonderful people stories that make the game so special. for all true for . more than football online. i think that's actually a question you should be asking do you see remarkably complacent about the fact that the most powerful country on the descent if you can't seem to get why do you think it's complacency the international criminal court set up to try the worst crimes on the planet as a new enemy in washington the trumpet ministration was accused of having no legitimacy and says it wants to die my guest this week here in the hague is. always the president of the i.c.c. how can he defend the court against such powerful opposition.

about suzy welcome to conflicts on thank you very much and welcome to the i.c.c. thank you the u.s. national security adviser john bolton has said he wants your court to die and he is happy to help bring about that demise do you realize what a serious blow that is to your work it is not a serious blow to court because one hundred and twenty three states parties to it too strongly supported this is the most powerful country in the world and we want them to be part of the court they're not and they want we hope there will be we will not cooperate with the i.c.c. he said we will provide no assistance to the i.c.c. we will not join the i.c.c. we will let the i.c.c. . die only after all to all intents and purposes the i.c.c.

is already dead to us now is her answer to you you want them to join this is the answer it couldn't be clearer could start the that is the answer from him the moment we are confident that. there will reconsider we are competent about confidence based on one hand they tell me tell. the source of hostility had been shown in the past never to the sixten that lead to run another ministration came in even though the maintained in principle. they have difficulties with the i.c.c. and its jurisdictional reach they still do it assist the court in very many ways including referring the duck situation to the court the united states government did move and in doing so when you're dealing with them trying to

take ministration over the next one second and when they voted in the security council to refer to the four situation to the i.c.c. they said they voted because they did not like the idea of impunity and for that reason that they refer notwithstanding their reservations about the court this is not just a refusal to cooperate this is a threat to take punitive measures against anyone even daring to investigate the actions of americans on the club or their closest allies with a view to holding them accountable in an international court i.c.c. judges and prosecutors who investigate americans will be barred from entering the us in their funds in the us would be targeting i think that's actually a question you should be casting about what that means under a little seriously well known seem to take this seriously you seem remarkably complacent about the fact that the most. awful country on earth are you saying it

wants you dead why do you think is complacency it is not complacency what i am saying is leave bad and we are getting them to reconsider their position and join the court and cooperate because this coolant was established for reasons that america can pass out in the first place and america has been quite strong in the past about international criminal justice they were at the forefront of nuremberg proceedings they have hoped with the administration of international criminal justice along the way since terminal times in the past you're talking to me about the past i'm talking to you about the present because if you're putting your head in the sand who you're not putting my head in the side what i'm saying here is that we need them to join us we have reasons the court has created for which the court in its creation have not updated the idea is that there should be

a place of accountability for those who commit genocide and those who commit crimes against humanity those who commit war crimes but reason those reasons are many imperative that is important to the united states as much as it is to the rest of the world and that is why this court was created you you keep repeating the two weeks ago the u.s. secretary of state might pompei i referred to a twenty seventeen request from the i.c.c. prosecutor to initiate an investigation into the situation in afghanistan that said poem pale could illegitimately target american personnel for prosecutions and sentencing in twenty eighteen the trumpet ministration warned there would be consequences if you went ahead with that request pompei understands that request is still pending is it still pending i don't know i don't know that my answer to you would change to what i already said but these are just the specifics of what pompei i was throwing to he says that. could illegitimately target american personnel for

prosecutions and sentencing that twenty seventeen request from the i.c.c. prosecutor to investigate the situation in afghan i cannot comment on pending matter that is a matter now pending before the temporal this court and we need to leave it at that are you going to challenge this incredibly hostile threat from the u.s. or bow down immediately and accept it. will put it to use those sort of a mood of the language becomes a little difficult. there are other things that can happen between cow towing and the media as you put it and was the other thing you said the point is now we. to consider that this court case important for the global interest for the interest of humanity they want you to change course the i.c.c. is attacking america's rule of law it's not too late for the i.c.c. to change course and we urge that it do so immediately direct direct appeal from

the u.s. secretary of state might. well it is as i said he wants i don't like it not hassle that as i already told you there's a matter pending before the team but what do you want me to tell you to tell you all right the temper is going to drop at like one so tell me this does the court stand by its twenty sixteen report which said there was a reasonable basis to believe the u.s. military had committed torture at secret detention sites in afghanistan operated by the cia again some of your report again and matter pending before a clutch of the what i can tell you is being in the public domain it's come from your court where i can tell you is that let's understand the jurisdiction the premise of the court. it is that states have the primary responsibility to do justice the court is only a court of last resort is one state unable unwilling to do justice that the i.c.c. . yes and titled to intervene now that means that for some states the ones we call

the evil states they call them as a mirror of conscience that they need to do justice so that justice does not become an orphan in the territory of sovereign national sovereignty at this time but you answer your question the other. question and this is relevant to it and the second part of the cause the restriction those who are not able to do justice there are a lot of countries around the world where when these things they're up they cannot administer justice it is easier to do atrocity than to do justice we saw that in rwanda before they tell you so i understand that right my question was does the court stand by its twenty sixteen point two percent there was a reasonable basis to believe the us military had committed torture secret tensions do you mean that because we mean in the court reporter you're talking there are

examination reports sunday which are made public we were given to the general assembly let's use one of them into the system explain to you have how we park now i am a judge the chief judge of the quarter as well so i speak to you from the perspective of the judiciary i cannot speak to you from the perspective of the office of the prosecutor that is not to say that if i don't answer any question in relation to the office of the prosecutor there is no answer but you're the president of the school that has a police of the front it's nuclear georgina roundings question on the list and i'm refusing to answer what's already been in the public meeting may be what people to make of that you can characterize it anywhere you want the point is that when one asked the judge i speak from my judgment i cannot be making comments on something else that is not in the within the ram it because i have to decide what you are talking about it's not for me as a judge ok so mr pompei i was not going to. a reply from you to his appeal to

change course is he he's not going to get he's going to get the same answer that i've got to listen to which is no answer yeah it definitely shook the case yes ok it's not just america is it america is far from being the only country that that's refuses to deal with you in fact the most powerful and populous countries in the world have decided that your type of justice isn't for them and talk about china india pakistan russia that's three out of five permanent members of the security council with the power to block your investigations in countries that are not signed up to your court was a question their veto is another serious block to work isn't it why is that a problem for me. it's for the court all right that's what i mean for the court if stage who should join the court haven't joined this is a big problem is that the most powerful and populous states in the but there are hundred twenty three states nationally ignore those c. one mistake people make often quite frankly is the ignore those who are in

unfocused and those who are not in that's not fact to those who aren't these that all three of them have intended to go in we can muster to come we must be able to respect the participation of a hundred and twenty three states parties who continue to have faith in the one hope the court let's not get all lost in the preferences of those who have not yet joined whom we hope will join at some point these two hundred twenty three countries do not and large vetoes in the permanent members of the security council they do it with a veto yes china it poses russia and the united states have a veto it is a factor of concern of course that. one of the weirdest cases come to the court is where the security council refers it verifies a case to the court because we call them situations in respect of countries that

are not states parties of course when you have the possibility of somebody blocking that possibility of doing justice. where the court would naturally not reach by where of its membership it is a matter of concern it is a let's give you a concrete example you want to investigate the abuses suffered by the wreck injured people me and mine that's that's already china has warned you off your claim of jurisdiction last year in the general assembly was based on an appropriate interpretation of the political legal concepts and might make the i.c.c. as well in the future more contentious undermining further its own thirty and credibility this is a certain. this is the kind of resistance you're facing among the permanent five members of the security council russia and similar criticisms accusing you of subjectively interpreted what it called the standards of international law it doesn't matter if they're right or wrong does it it matters that they have the

power and the veto to block your work again had to know would ray can prove on the answer the answer i give you is that. hundred twenty three state you have faith in this and we continue to work that just now we continue to watch those who have not joined to do so so that humanity all over the world under the umbrella you're watching is pulling on deaf ears well. if you actually asked yourself why it is that those states who have not joined haven't done so. either way that should be a question you may want to ask or reflect upon what it means we can write and number of pages thesis on those we're not here to write ph d. thesis we can do all that let's stay with the facts and what you were set up to do which is to try and the most serious crimes of the planet and that is very

important we should not lose sight and i find the veto that the three members that i mentioned permanent members of the security council have will keep you for instance from any serious prospect of trying any syrian officials that might be responsible for the mass killing and torture that has taken place that it's their veto that has prevented what human rights watch called a path to justice for syria's victims the fact is most go will not allow any referral of syrian leaders to court under any circumstances we can that's a big gap. it is it is a very important there's no question about that but i state vetoes a situation that should ordinarily be brought to court so that humanity is protected. by virtue of the mandate of the i.c.c. it is a serious problem but it is one that all of us in building all in that protection including you mr sebastian would need to touch them to reconsider because this is

about humanity it is not about the i.c.c. everyone keeps focusing i.c.c. i.c.c. we need to look beyond whine i.c.c. was created there were six million. jews killed because of their faith during the second world war we eight hundred thousand people rwandan genocide in the night and night i don't know the list i see so you keep going back and i'm staying in the present i'm talking about the relatives of the four hundred thousand victims of the assad regime who have absolutely zero chance of getting. the kind of justice that you would wish to deliver for them i'll just say not be a kindness to tell them that finally passed but i can do what i'm doing now using your program to them to reconsider. that position and joining. because the protection humanity under the rule watch this well that is what we

hope to see happen we live in a world that despite your honorable intentions we live in a world where the spots to get away with pretty much everything we are hoping the fact changes that this why this court was brought into play and there's an irony we have reason to think that that is actually a change there's an irony here isn't there if you kill one person with luck you'll be arrested tried and you're convicted you order the death of four hundred thousand people and we all know who we're talking about here and you get invited to peace talks just as i have not invited anybody no you haven't you haven't so why don't you but syrian officials have and that's the reality of today isn't it that's the america we all had more international law great a body of international law more courts more experts more judges but that's the reality one person you get tried you kill four hundred thousand you get invited to

peace talks that's hardly justices in the us i think you and i might be able to. extend. thinking loudly whether i should even commented on that but i want one to see where you're coming from but i would say that it is a matter that passed all of us me to the actions like. those concerned in this decision is to store up the reach of isis's jurisdiction to reconsider their petition you told the general assembly last year that the mere existence of this court serves as an obstacle to those wishing to commit crimes against humanity if that were true we would have seen the use of chemical weapons in syria along with the torture and extrajudicial killings the continuing slaughter in yemen the killings in south sudan the targeted executions in the slums of venezuela and the massive loss of life in your own home country nigeria. you can't

offer the kind of protection and you can't offer the obstacles that you claim a little less for let's back up to first of all the reality doesn't match your rhetoric does it i can tell you this i can tell you that yes this cold hands been an obstacle. to the conscience of those who would ordinarily but me in ways they would not be here if we didn't have the schools well nothing had happened you can see how it's really done not in venezuela not in syria when i cannot comment on some of those. it's a matter of you read the news when i can read you read the news you see what's happened i read the news but never seen some connection i tell you something is away this is the most charge i cannot comment on the propositions you just made contact can speak in general terms about the need for everyone to remember why the

court was here the reason why i cannot comment on what you said distinct takes any of those. cases come up at the i.c.c. . to be a problem for me not her chances that he's not shot i'm not sure that in a small much chance we have to keep hoping. thank you can not fail to notice a human gene it's manners will and the states men and women who make these decisions will reconsider their position so that everybody subscribe to the i.c.c. laws and there are some not for reconsidering their positions you have the withdrawal of existing signatories to the road treaty like the philippines and burundi and i ask you whether you can blame them because the big powers refused to collaborate with you watching this forms and we just recently had the malaysia join us don't forget this you had that what about the withdrawal of the philippines and burundi where there are clear cases to answer why not clear cases of human rights

violations what do you expect me to say to that it is for them they made the decision to draw for reasons that room reasons with you and i. can discuss it in another second stances but that's not what the i.c.c. . it's not ice he says it's a major we. feel work isn't it because not only are you having countries withdrawing you are having others that are flouting their commitments to the cause of the philippines and burundi ever to mention. drew because they say that i.c.c. was investigating cases in relation to that now why is that a problem for the i.c.c. in the moral sense that you're trying to apply because i.c.c. is doing it's one and people who choose to withdraw and then that's a problem for the i.c.c. i don't see it but you're doing your work i would be because i.c.c.

was precisely doing its why some people didn't like it that they made this unfortunate decision we regret in twenty sixteen the group of former world leaders learn as the elders called for the urgent reform of the i.c.c. required it said to improve its overall performance and effectiveness in delivering justice for all in a timely manner such reforms they said would lead to the enhance credibility of the court there have been no reforms since twenty sixty reforms. it depends on what we mean reform. i'd be the faster to tell you that as a human institution this court yes. of erotic review of that manner of doing one to two to do battle like we do in our lives not like every other site institutional company would do that is taken for granted but in

advance of what people are talking about the rather some reforms that are more difficult to achieve because of you need to amend the rooms tattooed on that's a more difficult proposition but closer to home judges will want to keep on reviewing how we do the one to improve how we are. no we do things that have been some serious missteps doesn't help when you have the acquittal of the former every coast president laurent gbagbo for instance earlier this year this was seen as a stunning defeat wasn't it for what was the first prosecution of a former head of state amnesty international called it a crushing disappointment to victims of post election violence in the country do you share that disappointment i do not share the counter rising of stunning defeat i do. understand the concern of those who speak on behalf of the victims i could see. they would be disappointed by such results but

not understanding oh i think with the victims. one can say they should not lead us to taking short cuts to do was short cut you need better prosecution something to the judge to not toughest one of your colleagues said the prosecutor had failed to submit sufficient evidence to demonstrate the responsibility of mr gbagbo as well as his former youth minister i can satisfy the burden of proof this is a prosecution failure isn't it i cannot comment on that because i mean the appeals court will be of this court and that kids might come of the appeal because of the time something i cannot comment on it because what i want to say that i was saying is that. you know it's not just like with all the press procedures i mean is perfect in the court or is it that there's too much of it is not i that everything

is part until everything is empowered thank you have a string of losses there in a string of reverse and you listen to me please along the way there's all kinds of continuum that we must take into account now judge i must tell you that i do not regard. that's a stunning the kind of. victims would be disappointed but we. other ways of trying to attend to the victims for instance the something we call the trust fund for victims by the way. to donate is not justice isn't it that's not justice to donate to the trust fund for victims something else that's not just them systems program in case there is no conviction am i right or wrong in thinking that a prosecutor's job is to bring to court he will pull case based on solid evidence

that will stand up in court and that hasn't been hurting the last meal if questions and he did not want to see if he seems to be written out that is something we can write a piece if he says now you know if you where you can give me a much simpler answer than that i cannot give you bad simple answer some things are not susceptible to simplistic answers you sense an excuse is not it is not an excuse the fact of the matter is this if you focused on accountability and we need to focus on the room started promised come to believe two people did not promise that every case that comes to court must result in a conviction that do you know. we are not here running for your cause i think you can try building up the holy inquisition even. right did not convict everybody or else when failed to stand up fortunately running out of temp you know that wherever you have child the only money to get really

three percent of went through the. city thank you very much for being a complex thank you. i'm. going to.

go to the robotics. clinic. wait a second we want the whole picture facts instead of big ideas shift deliver us. from other reality to cryptocurrency to your topics for live in an ever changing digital world let's talk digitalisation fair share.

to know that seventy seven percent of. our younger ben thanks a lot. that's me and me and you. and you know what it's time all voices are part. of the seventy seven percent to talk about people. this is where you cut. thirty minutes on t.w. . earth a home for saving global indios tell stories of creative people and innovative projects around the world ideas to protect the climate and boost green energy solutions by global ideas been by a series of global three thousand on d. w.

and online. the city in ruins maro a. symbol of a long conflict in the philippines. between the muslims and the christian population. last finance fighters occupied the city center tulsa seventeen president to tears his response was told. by hillary clinton never again football game of. the reconquest turned into tragedy. is not the kind of freedom that we want. how did not become a gateway to islamist terror until now the sorry guardian was sitting as the result of an exclusive report from a destroyed city. philippines in the sun. starts april eleventh on t.w.

. cut. this is. from berlin the united nations calls on militia troops to halt their advance on the capital of libya. the forces are commanded by a warlord whose enough power struggle with the un back government in tripoli the u.n. chief has been trying to head off for renewed civil war also coming up. in berlin thousands take to the streets to demand more affordable housing a growing population and not enough accommodations being built by driving.