PANEL 1: "Effectiveness of universal and national justice, as well as the recognition and respect of dignity and human rights"
Dr. Franco Marcelo Fiumara
Judge of the Criminal Court
-Sonia Elizabeth Cortéz de Madríz
Attorney General of the Republic of El Salvador
-Dr. Marco Antonio Sagastume
President of the College of Lawyers and Notaries
President of the Ibero-American Lawyers Forum
-Dr. Rubén Pacheco Inclán
President of the Inter-American Bar of Lawyers
Dr. Franco Marcelo Fiumara
Dear brothers of Paraguay, dear brothers from the world who have come to these true united nations, which is the Global Embassy of Activists for Peace, to be able to collaborate something important such as this, which is to find mechanisms to precisely achieve this: peace.
First of all, something outside of protocol perhaps; But as an Italo-Argentinian that I am, I wanted to send a big hug and a kiss from my heart to all my Italian compatriots from Almatriche, and all the neighboring towns of Italy that have suffered this devastating earthquake and even today, they are looking for the victims; For that reason, my solidarity with them, with my brothers.
I have a habit of speaking from the heart, and with this I give warmth to the word that is Rights, that perhaps is cold letter; And precisely, the tendency of the law is to protect, protect the human family, which is one of the fundamental principles of the Embassy of Activists for Peace; And from there one can make the approaches that are truly valuable: Human Rights.
That is why Dr. William Soto Santiago, thank you, thank you very much for the work you do together with all the Activists for Peace, using two great principles for this achievement: education, as prevention; And justice, as containment. With this we will really be able to find formulas to understand our genres of humans, of color, of ethnicity or culture, for us to really know and that we want to construct, and from there be able to integrate ourselves.
I used for my second doctoral thesis (whose book you can see outside) these postulates. I have learned a lot from all of you, from Dr. Soto, from your collaborators, from my colleague Liz Cowan, the prosecutor from here, Paraguay, who is also accompanying me; And rightly, I titled my book: "Education and Justice as a peaceful method of prevention."
It may go unnoticed, but how important is it that these postulates always be present; And this I say just to introduce ourselves in the subject that is being addressed precisely in this panel, which is of the utmost importance. Why? Because in this month, from the 1st of October until precisely the 15th or 16th day in which it was executed, it is the 70th anniversary of the first international trial called the Main Trial of Nuremberg.
And what did the Nuremberg Trial leave us as teaching? The utility of a supranational justice, which is the most important thing that could happen juridically in the 20th century and in the 21st century. The importance of the establishment of an International Court, which is the only peaceful mechanism that we can have at a global level, to have a containment mechanism in a peaceful way. Logically, that crimes do not go unpunished; And Nuremberg taught us that, whose judges have proved by the evidence that has merited the greatest criminal damage of the 20th century, which was generated by Nazism in perpetration of the Shoah. Rightly, the elimination of the European Jewish community and later the world; and we cannot allow that.
That is why I am celebrating this Conference, and I am pleased that magnificent judges of the International Criminal Court can actively participate in this conference today.
I want to conclude now to give place to those who accompany us today, with something very simple; And I want to make an call of alert, just something that I rightly accompany ... and I love the integration that we are all manifesting today, and I am part of a continent, apart from the American, the European continent, as I said I am Italo-Argentinian; I feel Italian as well as Argentine. And I want to mark what I consider to be a serious mistake of the European Court, when perhaps it removes from catalog, from terrorist entities, from terrorist organisms, the Hamas group.
In the context of, and in the international community there cannot exist a group whose Fundamental Charter, Article 7, of Hamas, proposes to eliminate a people from the face of the Earth; And I invite you to read it, that article, which can be found on the internet.
It is very serious, because it has the same postulates that Adolf Hitler had in Main Kampf. We are in a time of prevention; in this regard, it is the reason for a warning to the European Court.
Israel has the right to self-determination and peaceful survival, and peaceful coexistence, as our ancestors (those of us who are Christians or Catholics); we are the same essence, the same nature and we derive from the same God; and that is what we have to respect.
Now, I'm going to part with these words, maybe abusive, maybe not, but I think it was necessary to put them in the context of the importance of this.
And to thank again –reiterate –, thanking you all again for being here, and above all, Dr. William Soto Santiago, Gabriela Lara, Camilo Montoya, and all of you who work with such dignity, for the benefit of us all, of the human race. If we think about it that way, notice how simple, we can rightly manifest this. And thanks to the basic principles, Dr. Soto, they are precisely: education as prevention, and justice as containment.
Thank you all very much for the moment. Thank you very much. Really, thank you.
Alright, now. We aboard. This was my short, concise, but persuasive presentation; That's how we play when we talk about the heart.
Today we are joined by three great panelists: Sonia Elizabeth Cortéz de Madríz, attorney general of the Republic of El Salvador. Welcome! What an honor to share this moment with you.
Dr. Marco Antonio Sagastume, President of the Guatemalan College of Lawyers and Notaries, and President of the Ibero-American Lawyers Forum of Guatemala. A lovely country. Many thanks.
And finally, Dr. Rubén Pacheco Inclán, president of the Inter-American Bar Association of Mexico; you will be able to find a wonderful book (that you will find outside, together with mine), called: "Human Rights in light of the logical principle, reason enough." A very nice title, but above all, the content, is worth reading. Many thanks. I'm going after your dedication.
METHODOLOGY in this new dynamic of work, that I think is brilliant, because we can all interact, is magnificent. And we will have to use supreme intelligence – which I sometimes do not have – that in 3 minutes each, we can be giving the appropriate answers to this question. But these answers, if they are linear questions on a methodological problem, you all can answer them from your own focus, from each activity and from your own perspective, which I believe is what will enrich us.
And not only that; for comfort, whoever prefers to start, you have the word; what I am going to ask of you, is for three minutes from each.
First question, for the whole audience:
What do you think is the impact on autonomy and independence of the International Criminal Court, of Article 16 of the Rome Statute, which stipulates that the UN Security Council may request the International Court to suspend an investigation or of a trial?
Sonia Elizabeth Cortéz de Madríz
Good morning to all. Here, as the doctor well said said, we are going to give opinions which I believe will be mere approaches to a proposal that will probably have to be formalized at the end of the Summit.
My opinion on the question that has been raised to the power that Article 16 of the Rome Statute grants to the UN Security Council, whether it could impact its independence and its autonomy, summed it up as follows:
In my opinion, with all due respect, it could directly affect the autonomy of the International Criminal Court. Why? Because there is a suspension in an investigation that is already running, or you are asking not to start an investigation; this alters the independence, legal capacity of the Court for the performance of its functions, and even the purpose of the essence of its creation.
The fact that the Court is requested, even on the basis of Chapter 7 of the Charter of the United Nations, is not sufficient to come in and interrupt the prosecution or to defer an entire process. There is alteration, both in the administrative aspect and much more in the jurisdictional one.
And to the case comes a reflection, and I will try to reduce it in summary. I think that in this regime of protection of victims and witnesses, in El Salvador it is a very delicate and very difficult subject, even talking about common crimes; how much more to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, which we all know are war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity. In that light, things bear a greater magnitude. And the Security Council comes and asks for the suspension. What to do with all the administrative logistics that have been made for the protection of victims and witnesses for twelve months? And even for a renewal, because the article also mentions that the petition can be renewed.
In that sense it completely alters all this administrative logistics, I repeat; and therefore, there is also much risk, much risk in the protection of people, for example: Risk in losing their testimonies, and – consequently – risk in arriving at the real truth and the administration of justice.
Therefore, I believe that an analysis should be made so that these two competences are not intermingled; Because Dr. Soto said it very well, they are two different bodies: one is of political origin, the Security Council; And the other is a legal or judicial body.
Then there must be an independence of their roles, without interference from one or the other. A jurisdiction is being affected, which is the very essence of the creation of the International Criminal Court; and those perpetrators of such atrocious crimes would remain in impunity, as the very preamble to the Court's creation says, are so atrocious that they surpass any imagination. If we are faced with this kind of facts, we cannot allow interference from any other body, even if that is the Security Council.
That could be the first approach to the first question, doctor.
Dr. Marco Antonio Sagastume
A little history. Immanuel Kant told us that the only peace that exists is that of cemeteries; that as long as interests and that interests are historically present in the human being, there will always be war, Immanuel Kant told us. And that is how in 1919 the League of Nations was created, which failed because it was not even supported by the members who founded it.
But on 26 June 1945, before signing the Charter of the United Nations, there was an euphoria of the fifty-one members who had historically initiated the background to that Charter of the United Nations.
And there were two proposals: Australia's proposal that all fifty-one States have sovereign equality; And the proposal of the five states that currently have the right to veto. And within these two proposals, two countries supported Australia's proposal: Australia and Guatemala (because Guatemala was governed by a pedagogue, Dr. Juan José Arévalo).
Unfortunately, why did the other countries, especially Latin America, vote to veto these five states? And do you know why? Because we were offered the Marshall Plan. The Marshall Plan was already going to Japan, it was already implying the advance; and that destruction that had been made in Japan was rising again in development. And they offered us the Marshall Plan. It never arrived.
But it is not only the right to veto or whether they are permanent Members, but also they have control of all the force of the UN: the armies of the blue helmets. That is a serious problem, and give... look, it was a mistake, catastrophic, to have given these five states that control.
I have read the documents of Dr. Soto, William Soto Santiago, and he tells us that there was a noble part in those principles. I agree with Dr. Soto's approach: We have to democratize the UN; although as the doctor also says, one has a political purpose and another judicial purpose, they should not be intermingled; it creates a problem. You see, for crimes against humanity, which the Security Council has five permanent states that have that right to veto.
Article 16 is a clear intrusion, because you see, Human Rights have been born before the public power. It is not the public power that has facilitated it for us, it is the opposite, they have never wanted it; and see it with our States.
For example in Guatemala we have been filled by the forces of security that Human Rights are to support the delinquent. See, how ridiculous! You do not see the message of love for yourself and your neighbor, as Dr. William Soto Santiago says.
Dr. Rubén Pacheco Inclán
Many thanks. I said that I cannot thank all those who have made this extraordinary event possible, because I would spend the three minutes they gave me to comment on this point; But I would like to thank Dr. William Soto for making this effort, to Paraguay for receiving us, to the people who have made this extraordinary event possible where they have allowed us to be.
And of course, I also want to start with a sentence that I put in one of my books where I say: "Unfortunately the norm, as beautiful as it is, only becomes poetry if it is not received by the human being.”
The situation is that, all these approaches that we make on legal schemes, would not have reason to be if they do not reach their factual application, if we cannot make the approach to the human being with the practicality of the norm.
In this specific case, when we talk about whether the autonomy of the International Court is important, it is certainly a yes; it requires total autonomy. Because, unfortunately, personal interests always strongly influence some decisions of a country, of a specific state policy; that is why we must not forget, I insist, a fundamental approach: we need the reason for the application of the rule, yes. But we also have to think: what reason? Because we have converted that reason in an instrumental reason, a reason for benefit, a reason that only gives attention to what I get: personal benefit.
Today we do not evaluate people for their human quality but for the vehicle they bring, for the clock they possess, for the cell phone they carry. Unfortunately, as long as all the work we do does not make sense in the application itself for the benefit of the human being, we will continue to make instrumental reason, instruments of power, instruments that direct societies but do not care for them, do not directly benefit them.
Therefore, in regard to this approach (which I must thank Dr. Fiumara for the commercial he made about my book, which I thank him infinitely because it will surely interest you more from the words of Dr. Fiumara), I have to say that if we do not have sufficient capacity to understand the norm with its ontological sense – that we are approaching philosophy –, any norm will have, or any effort, will have no sense. Because there is no doubt that the human being as recipient of the law, not only receives poetry, receives practicality from the norm.
In this case, of course, I am fully convinced that the independence of the International Criminal Court is indispensable. That would be my initial comment to the first question.
Thank you very much.
Dr. Franco Marcelo Fiumara
Well, the truth is how magnificent, is it not? How important are these answers that each of them have given us; also the magnificent speech, brilliant, and the request that must accompany all of us from each institution that we integrate, for which the doctor is a candidate for the Nobel Prize. Brilliant!
Well, back on track. Drawing conclusions from the first questions, that way we can get to work and you all can elaborate... well depending on the time we have towards the end, to ask your own questions. Also on the internet I believe that there is an internationally enabled page for those who want to accompany with questions; and they will have the answers.
The first was brilliant, when it affects, which the prosecutor in El Salvador also tells us about how the autonomy of the International Criminal Court affects the interference of two United Nations bodies; which generates impunity. What a paradox! All international treaties that speak fairly of crimes such as genocide or crimes against humanity are justly against impunity.
And with this it is manifested – as the judge has pointed out – no more or less than a link of impunity, leaving without effect to the fundamental, the fundamental basis of justice as well: that is, to know the truth. And the truth must be developed and discovered immediately. That teaches us at least when one has to investigate crimes of this magnitude.
Afterwards, as our magistrate also told us, a thorough analysis must be made of the fact that there is no confrontation between these institutions, and to achieve valid international mechanisms, to make it work as it works as it deserves, as the XXI century needs, 70 years after, practically, the creation of the United Nations.
It is important because of the new margins of criminality, which may not be open confrontation wars such as World War II, but terrorism or other armies that fall into the hands of leaders who are generally harmful to humanity.
It goes in corroboration with what Dr. Sagastume told us in his reply, when he explained intelligently who they supported and who did not; and we find only two states - loosely - that wanted to curb power over realpolitik, because I believe that both Guatemala and Australia (which had a very hard war both on the European continent and in Asia against the Japanese empire) were the ones who voted in favor of the independence and not of the veto of the five States that took the flags, just like the allies against Nazism and the Japanese empire.
And that is why he cleverly marks, in his speech regarding his answer, how these mechanisms must be achieved (and beyond, again, personally, thank you for Dr. Soto's proposal).
Afterwards, our doctor Rubén Pacheco Inclán also marked the independence and autonomy that the International Criminal Court must have with respect to political organizations or executives, such as the United Nations; because from the political order is precisely where we start having vetoes or prohibitions or cuts to be able to just contain those who are war criminals or criminals against humanity or genocide.
That is an extremely intelligent contribution, and as he says: sometimes with a lot of philosophy, to understand it, but also with a sense of great humanity at the bottom of it.
Now, with these small conclusions, let's go to question number two; and you can take it as you wish, in the order you prefer.
Question number two:
What is your proposal to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the ICC Prosecutor's Office (or neighboring organizations)?
Lic. Sonia Elizabeth Cortéz de Madríz
Thank you very much, but I want to make a very small parenthesis, taking care and in obedience to the three minutes, in the first intervention I failed to give the respective acknowledgments, but I do not want to withdraw from this place as ungrateful or uneducated; So I also recognize the work that has been done in this whole organization of this Summit, I thank Dr. William Soto Santiago for the invitation, and of course, to my namesake Sonia too, for this communication we had to make possible my stay here today.
I also join the nomination, and sign where must be signed for our beloved Dr. Soto to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, I completely agree with it; and of course, I do not have that passion that Marcos Sagastume gave, but here we are answering the second question.
If we are talking about broadening the prosecutor's scope of action, I believe that not only must it be subscribed to, as it is currently provided for in the Statute, which is the referral by the States parties, on the part of the Security Council, and even gives it a space to his acting in office; but I believe that the scope of the complaint should be extended and go further.
I have a lot of confidence in non-governmental organizations; these organizations have a lot of contact with the population, with its inhabitants, and therefore could perhaps, to that extent, broaden that area of denunciation.
Secondly, also very much in agreement with this new figure that Dr. Soto mentioned today: the regional prosecutor, because this would give opportunity to an extension in the investigation, in the place of the facts, in situ.
Then, I think that there could be a little, expanding of competition; and to that extent we would also expand ourselves in the efficiency and effectiveness of this official. But above all, above all things – and this I have reaffirmed even more at this Summit –, there is that certainty that we must have all those of us that claim to be public servants: the awareness of the approach to human in all our functions. Only with that certainty of human dignity, of the value of the human person, could we surrender ourselves more to this function and assert all our activities for the purpose we have set ourselves.
I fully agree also, in the purpose of this Summit, which seeks the strengthening of the International Criminal Court, the complete rescue of its autonomy and independence.
That would answer the second question.
Dr. Marco Antonio Sagastume
General Otto Pérez Molina, as President of the Republic of Guatemala ratified the International Criminal Court. Yours truly, as president of the College of Lawyers, had to ask for the resignation of this general for corruption, and we have him in jail. Also, to the ex-president Roxana Baldetti… Unfortunately, because it has become an international shame, but the people of Guatemala reacted and with the popular clamor we managed to remove him from there. And justice, for example, in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, says that everyone has the right to a fair, public and independent trial, which allows them to prove their innocence or assert guilt. This has a ... civil rights (because this is a civil right), have the value of security; that is, security is part of the duties of state deontology; and yet, as I said at the beginning, it is the peoples who have achieved the subject of Human Rights.
Note, for example, that when the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted by consensus in Paris in ‘48, it was not called what we now call it; it was called the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man. And who did not agree? The woman, because she said: We are not present in that Declaration! And they said: "We do not agree, we do not agree ..." Especially the legal commission, which had been created at the UN since 1946. And they did not agree, and kept insisting. And it was even, you see, seven years later that they managed to change the name, from Rights of Men to Human Rights; and since that moment has been women who have most predicted and advanced in the subject of Human Rights at a universal level. An applause for women, please!
Note that the rest of the values that give content to Human Rights ... For example, in values of political rights is freedom, which is the ability to act without harming other people; then in economic, social and cultural rights is the value of equality, which is the value forgotten in our continent, fortunately, and the rights of peoples, in the value of solidarity, which is what is awakening all this type of activities led by Dr. William Soto Santiago.
I believe that we can advance in the International Criminal Court by joining the proposal of CUMIPAZ, that all countries that have not done so, do. Let's take that advance! Look: that universal justice has been slowly advancing. On one occasion after giving a talk to the spiritual guides (along with Dr. William Soto) from Guatemala, one approaches me and says:
"See tata,” he said. “I cannot read or write, but I do not make as many mistakes as you."
"Ay tata,” I told him. “Forgive me, Forgive me if I offended you."
"Yes,” he said. “It offended me."
"In what did I offend you?"
"You said that time is passing, that we have to unite."
"Yes, I did."
"Time does not pass,” he said. “It is a living being; the one that passes is you."
And that's right.
Look then at how hard it has been for us to reach, for example, Article 1 of the Declaration: "All beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights; And gifted as we are, of reason and conscience, we should behave fraternally with one another.” This Article began well on June 12, 1776 with the Declaration of Virginia, where the Human Right that was created, was created in that continent. What was that right? The right to rebellion, in that Virginia Declaration, and we must continue to use it for the benefit of the population, of all our peoples.
You see, we can move forward because the International Criminal Court is a historic prize to humanity, in the protection of that dignity, as Thomas Aquinas told us: “Aristotle is the discovery that dignity is based on the fact that we are the maximum evolution of the human being and we have a divine spark, which is our spirit.” Thank you very much.
Dr. Rubén Pacheco Inclán
Undoubtedly that in regards to the question that Mr. Fiumara makes, one approach that I want to make is in the light of what I know of our country.
Our country, unfortunately, Mexico, is going through a difficult, very difficult time; so much so that today when we talk about criminalization we talk about Mexicanization, which has not been pleasant for us. However, efforts are being made, and an effort that I will relate analogically with this situation of the International Criminal Court, is that: we seek the independence of the Prosecutor's Office, the Attorney General's Office, that they can work autonomously, because they belong to the Executive Branch at this time, and as such, their activities are subject to the disposition of its executive.
What is needed in the specific case of Mexico? The independence of their prosecutors, because each region has its problems, each zone has its problems. The same applies to the International Criminal Court. Each region, each situation, each specific case of conflict, has particularities that only those who are within the same region will know. That is why I believe that one of the most important situations is the approach of regional prosecutors, so that the International Criminal Court may function properly.
However, I do want to make one more point about this situation that I posed: as long as we do not approach ontological and philosophical elements to the law, we will continue to have the same problem that has been raised for a long time: the reification of the subject. What happens is that we have turned the subject into something, to the other, it is a thing, it has lost dignity, we have taken dignity from the other: dignity is mine, dignity is my own, only dignity is worth the one I have, the other is only an instrument to obtain my benefits.
Therefore, we have to do yes, logical structures, structures of power, structures of attention, yes; but we also have to give ontological and philosophical background to the activities we develop. Undoubtedly Dr. William Soto has demonstrated through several comments that I have heard and something I was reading yesterday, where we have to give human elements to the norm. On this occasion, in view of this question, I consider that as long as we do not give it and recover the attention of the dignity to the other, it will remain the dignity and the self-justification of the “me,” in attention to trampling the each other. That is the main problem.
Thank you very much doctor.
Dr. Franco Marcelo Fiumara
We are going to be making the conclusions of such important questions, are we not? As Dr. Cortes told us when she speaks of "a lot of trust generated by non-governmental organizations", such as the Embassy of Activists for Peace. Non-governmental organizations were the cornerstone of the Statute of Rome in the pre-commission, in the commission of preparation, with all the magnificent contributions that have been made precisely to the elaboration of this Statute.
What importance we have, that the international norm that rightly governs us, regrettably with many States, as it has previously marked that they have not yet adhered. The importance of adhesion must really be fundamental to achieving the goals of peace.
Also, the doctor intelligently marks the effectiveness of the regional prosecutors. Very cleverly, right? This will provide the system with greater efficiency and efficacy. That is the reason behind the ignorance that it marks us in the approaches of Human Rights, and thus dignifies the function.
Dr. Sagastume marks a scourge that unfortunately in Latin America seems an endemic evil, an epidemic, called: corruption; and therefore the continent of ours that is so beautiful, with people so beautiful and with such a friendly human genre, we cannot really get ahead. The fight against corruption is fundamental, because corruption brings terrorism, brings despotism and above all brings tyrannies.
Finally, also the search, noted to us by Dr. Pacheco, the search of independence of the Prosecutor's offices and attorneys, subject also, far from the political power. As is the case at the International Criminal Court when the decisions of the Court or the autonomy of the Court is vetoed politically, and marks very well the ways that Dr. William Soto Santiago teaches us how to dignify the human genre, and the human right with, human elements (for that reason it is very useful to speak of the heart, as I manifested to you myself).
Now, let's move on to the third and final question because time is tyrant and we have endless questions that we are going to reduce.
Last question for my colleagues and panelists (and take the order that you prefer).
What mechanism do you think could be implemented to sign or ratify the Rome Statute those countries that have not yet done so?
Open the panel; take the word of your choice, in any order. Doctor, ladies first.
Sonia Elizabeth Cortéz de Madríz
Thank you. I know that they even passed a piece of paper there, but I also do not want to fail to recognize that behind the great leaders also at the same time are the great teams of work; And we are so grateful to this host country and to all this team that has treated us wonderfully, thank you very much and may God bless you for that hospitality.
With regard to the question, the complete and precise disclosure of both the universal justice and the functioning of the International Criminal Court is necessary; Raising awareness of the Rome Statute by letting them know that it is an entity with a special jurisdiction, that the crimes that the Court is going to meet, we have already mentioned, are those of great importance and that affect and impact in a very direct, the same human race.
Make visible its benefits, because the States parties enter into this concert of nations that are protected under the International Criminal Court and the same Statute, because they are in some way being protected in the future, from possible aggressions.
But above all there are two aspects that need to be emphasized: the principle of non-retroactivity and the principle of complementarity. Why do I say this? Because in El Salvador that was one of the fears they had, if it was going to be retroactive, what was its scope; just eleven months ago we signed the Rome Statute, in November 2015.
So the act of speaking about these two principles would be good: that it is not retroactive, rather at the time that the Statute is signed; And even more, in the time taken by the State party; and complementarity, which means that only if the national court does not give or cannot or will not, is when the Statute or the International Criminal Court enters.
That is how I would quickly summarize how we could make knowledge of this universal justice.
Dr. Marco Antonio Sagastume
Thank you very much. I believe that in parallel with this entire project that our doctor spoke to us about, we should work together with the project of Dr. William Soto Santiago, to democratize the United Nations; And that will help a lot.
I also think a lot about Africa. Africa is a continent ... In the West we begin Human Rights through individual protection. Not Africa; In Africa, from the 1966 Algiers Charter they began to raise the rights of peoples; And nevertheless in the UN it was until after 48 when they asked Dr. Hector Gross Espiell of Uruguay to investigate if there were collective rights, and that is when he gives his version that there are these rights and are the rights of solidarity, where the subject is not only the individual, but the collectivities.
Then I think there is also need for an educational project. What happens is that when we received the conference yesterday from Dr. Borrero of Colombia, and that told us that NASA had already announced, that our planet, from 2030 to 2050 dies, and that we must raise the conquest of other planets.
“Oh my God!” I said. “And how is it going to fit into the educational project? How will it fit, what is the hope?” The Pandora’s box opened and all I see is hope; And now they tell us that there is no hope either.
I always think that as long as we have these kinds of activities, let us agree, let's talk about integration as Dr. Salazar Grande told us. Look, and as it is his second surname I tell you: this is a big project, world integration; so I think we should work together, following ... but with that project of hope still.
Thank you very much.
Dr. Rubén Pacheco Inclán
Thank you very much. Of course, the origin of the lack of momentum, perhaps, the signing of agreements for the Court, to go to the agreements that accept the International Criminal Court, is to promote democracies. Undoubtedly, a country that does not have clear democracies, will not want to be subject to a Court from which it can be object later.
Undoubtedly the first element would be: the impetus to democracies, demonstration of their applicability; because unfortunately a significant case has not yet been distinguished in America, for example, where the International Criminal Court has already given us a sample of the result itself.
But more importantly, what I was saying a moment ago, are the paradigm shifts. We must change from our trenches, so that this can give tangible results; because undoubtedly the purpose of considering the International Criminal Court is to continue to commit crimes against humanity, to protect humanity, to seek the achievement of a level of protection of individuals as well as their rights; and there is no doubt that we have to do it.
And I will close with a phrase of Albert Einstein, which seems fundamental, where it says: "If you want things to get better, you have to change your mind; And start by changing you.”
Thank you very much.
Dr. Franco Marcelo Fiumara
Thank you Doctor. Brilliant as usual. We are going to make quick conclusions so that we can go to the questions, because time is a tyrant and it is already running out on us.
The doctor rightly says that the struggle one must take in this sense is to realize that it is a just international and special jurisdiction because of the importance and magnitude of the crimes committed in the human race.
And it marks two basic legal principles: that is the principle of retroactivity, which revives when a state takes part and becomes a member (backwards is not applicable); and complementarity: This marks for us that if national justice does not work or national justice is co-opted, complementarity works. As in the case of Milošević, took place at the International Criminal Court; another case was Nazi Germany, as we know, that had a justice, not in the criminal, but criminal one that was co-opted; a Nazi justice. And so when many criticize the Nuremberg Trials (a gross error) ... because the other way was for the Nazis themselves to be judged by the Volksgerichtshof, who were the Nazi judges who swore loyalty to Hitler; and therefore was the creation of the courts, the Nuremberg Tribunals.
Dr. Sagastume also marks for us that we must democratize following the proposed steps or the postulates of Dr. William Soto, to the United Nations; and the integration of all the organisms in them.
And finally, Dr. Pacheco is showing us the lack of agreements and the solution of pushing democracies as paradigm shifts.
I apologize for the brevity of the conclusions, but I will move on to the specific questions. If you want, just answer one; because we are already in overtime.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS SESSION
If there are sufficient legal grounds for the autonomy of the International Criminal Court, what are the steps or processes for its attainment?
Sonia Elizabeth Cortéz de Madríz
Well, the fundamental principle is its specialized jurisdiction, the great crimes, the great atrocities, which are of the knowledge of its competence; I believe, which gives reason to be able to promote the autonomy and independence of the International Criminal Court.
MODERATOR - Dr. Franco Marcelo Fiumara
Thank you very much. I do not know, if someone wants to add something else, or we go to the second question; let’s go to the second question. Thank you very much for understanding.
What measures can the High Courts take to build justice, and thus peace, in countries where there are high numbers of victims of sexual abuse?
Dr. Marco Antonio Sagastume
Oh, look, my God! I am the father of four daughters, and in 1970 I launched a little book, a book that is "Tales to Live in Peace," a children's course on Human Rights, and proposed that every time they say "boy", say "girl," each time they say "man," say "woman". And the Central American presidents have told me: "Marco, but how far do you want to go with the language? Because even we have to say us(males) and us(females)." I tell them: "Look, even the Royal Spanish Academy has sent me many letters ...", but I insist, everyone, because what does not appear does not exist. And we must insist, take away the machismo! And just as we are removing that machismo from the Royal Spanish Academy, we can do so in all these crimes against humanity.
I believe that humanity is becoming more and more aware, although it seems that it is not so; I believe that the consciousness has been advancing and that there are mechanisms that are already being given. For example, the International Criminal Court is an unprecedented step forward.
You see, when it was approved ... pardon, when King Juan sin Tierra, in 1215, on June 12, approved the Magna Carta, it was not because he wanted to; it was imposed on men. That is why I tell you, Human Rights are born before the public power.
In 1809 an institution was established there in Sweden, which is now in all America, it is the Ombudsman, it is the representative of the people to defend the people.
But nevertheless, many times we see that that representative in America proposes the President of the Republic; that is not possible. We have to move forward to achieve what is posing this question.
Dr. Rubén Pacheco Inclán
I will say very quickly: what do we need? Education: education so that people know what to do in these cases, not only in the crime of sexual abuse or crimes of a sexual nature, we have to bring people knowledge.
I was part of the Attorney General's Office in Mexico, and there were situations where they said, "Hey, give me a recommendation on something to do." There are no panaceas; we have to know exactly what the situation is and the origin of the problem. When I said to them, "Well, the first thing you have to do, preventive measures: put lights on all night." –
"We have no light, the light has not come to our population, our place." Of course we cannot invent general things, everything derives from the particular circumstances of the events.
That is why it is so important, that we know, that we bring education especially to people, to avoid not only this, all the problems of violation of rights.
MODERATOR - Dr. Franco Marcelo Fiumara
Interesting conclusion: Education and justice as a method of prevention.
Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen; Dr. William Soto Santiago, to you in particular, for allowing us to be enriched with the knowledge of all those who have attended and participated today. Thanks to all of you. Welcome, and until the next opportunity.