Brazil’s Lula backtracks on Putin arrest safety at Rio G20
Putin missed the G20 summit in India, avoiding any risk of criminal detention under an ICC warrant for alleged war crimes.
Published On 11 Sep 202311 Sep 2023
Brazil’s leader has withdrawn his personal assurance that Russian President Vladimir Putin would not be arrested if he attends next year’s Group of 20 summit in Rio de Janeiro, saying it would be up to the judiciary to decide.
President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva also questioned Brazil’s membership in the United Nations war crimes court, saying on Monday “emerging countries often sign things that are detrimental to them”.
“I want to know why we are members but not the United States, not Russia, not India, not China,” Lula said. “I’m not saying I’m going to leave the court. I just want to know why Brazil is a signatory.”
Putin missed this year’s G20 gathering in the Indian capital, New Delhi, avoiding possible political opprobrium and any risk of criminal detention under an International Criminal Court (ICC) warrant.
In March, the ICC announced an arrest warrant for Putin over the war crime accusation of unlawfully deporting Ukrainian children. The Kremlin denies the accusations insisting the warrant against Putin is “void”.
Russia issued an arrest warrant for Karim Khan, the prosecutor at The Hague-based war crimes court, in May and he was added to the “wanted list” of its Ministry of Internal Affairs.
‘The judiciary decides’
Brazil is a signatory to the Rome Statute, which led to the founding of the ICC. Lula raised eyebrows at the weekend when he told Indian news network Firstpost: “If I’m the president of Brazil and if he [Putin] comes to Brazil, there’s no way that he will be arrested.”
He changed tack on Monday at a press conference in Brazil telling reporters: “I don’t know if Brazil’s justice will detain him. It’s the judiciary that decides, it’s not the government.”
Putin has skipped recent international gatherings and sent his Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov to New Delhi instead for the September 9-10 G20 meeting, even though India is not an ICC signatory.
On Saturday, the G20 nations adopted a declaration that avoided condemning Moscow for the war in Ukraine but called on all states to refrain from using force to grab territory.
The next summit is slated for November 2024 in Rio de Janeiro and Lula said he hoped “by then the war is over”.
This is what happens when you’re wanted for war crimes. The reason the US, Russia, India and China are not members is the the possibility of needing to hand over citizens to the Hague.
so US don’t want to take reponsability for their own war crimes?
As an American, we should sign the treaty, and we should remand people to The Hague if they’re indicted for war crimes. The US needs to stop carving out exceptions for itself in contexts like this. It’s frustratingly contradictory with our stated desire to reinforce the modern rules-based geopolitical order - and I’m certain it’s quite a bit more than “frustrating” for non-Americans to watch.
The republican party didn’t want to take responsibility for war crimes.
President Bill Clinton was critically involved in setting the thing up, but left office before he could sign it.
Dubya, aka president George Bush, then pulled out of it entirely unless they baked in perpetual blanket immunity for the US. Notably this was before 9/11, legalizing torture, Afghanistan, and Iraq.
Uh, Clinton is a war criminal
I mean, yeah…
The US has their own justice system. War crimes are taken to US courts, offenders prosecuted and jailed. What the US doesn’t do is wait for international courts to act.
War crimes are taken to US courts, offenders prosecuted and jailed.
Sometimes.
Almost never
Our laws align with international law.
spoiler
sadfasfasdfsa
That’s why it’s gitmo. It’s not under US law. If it was those prisoners would have other kinds of rights that we don’t want them to have.
Last US War crime I can remember was Clint Lorance who k I liked some Afgan villagers. He was serving a 19 year sentance, and was pardoned by Trump.
spoiler
sadfasfasdfsa
no?, your justice is very different from other countries
Other countries isn’t international law.
Oh yeah the US breaking the Geneva Convention by fucking torturing people to death totes didn’t break international law
🤣
😂
The US has a law that says they would invade The Hague if they ever tried an US citizen there
Nobody is ever going to arrest Putin, because if they did they’d have to explain why they don’t do the same for Bush, Cheney, Blair, etc.
Nobody is going to arrest the leader of a nation with Nuclear Weapons.
why they don’t do the same for Bush, Cheney, Blair, etc.
Iirc the USA said the didn’t care about Hague and that they would invade netherlands if they ever tried to arrest a US politician or general.
The United States is not a member of the International Criminal Court (ICC). The Act authorizes the President of the United States to use “all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any U.S. or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court”. This authorization led to the act being colloquially nicknamed “The Hague Invasion Act”, as the act allows the President to order U.S. military action, such as an invasion of The Hague, where the ICC is located, to protect American officials and military personnel from prosecution or rescue them from custody.
Indeed. Someone should be the first one though
Lulapalooza
If Putin was more open to diplomacy then he’d probably be safer from international arrest, since it would kill diplomacy to speak of arresting the person you’re negotiating with. But if you’re the one who killed diplomatic efforts yourself, well you gotta imagine they’re thinking of other ways to deal with you.
Putin missed the G20 summit in India, avoiding any risk of criminal detention under an ICC warrant for alleged war crimes.
This does not make sense. India is not a signatory to the Rome Statute.
END OF LIST
Wanted to edit those out but it’s bugging
Edit: now it worked
