Dato’ Ambiga’s American funders reject the Rome Statute

Ambiga received extensive funding for her activities from US agencies, including US State Department money from an NED subsidiary, the National Democratic Institute (NDI). The NDI provided her training and supported Bersih. Source (pic): TTF Files

TTF: The US has openly admitted that it is opposed to the ICC as its own soldiers could become the subject of political lawsuits (see news item below).

For the record, the ICC began functioning on 1 July 2002, the date the Rome Statute entered into force.

Not many are aware that when President Bill Clinton signed the treaty before the end of his term in office, Congress refused to ratify it.

Nonetheless, on the 18th of May 2019, it was revealed that Malaysia’s (then) newly minted government was almost entirely composed of US government-funded fronts.

People like Dato’ Ambiga Sreenevasan joined the ranks of several Pakatan leaders in receiving extensive funding for her activities from US sources, including the US State Department, that channelled truckloads of money from an NED subsidiary, the National Democratic Institute (NDI).

The NED wanted to infuse Bersih and Pakatan with Zionist themed ideologies and knowhow to help them bring down the (then) ruling BN government.

The plan was to turn Pakatan into the next Government of Malaysia (GoM) on the pretext that the BN government was oppressive, despotic and fanatic.

Everyone who received funding agreed to work towards dismantling the Monarchical Institution and liberalising people of Islamic faith.

They were conditioned by the US to think that Malaysia could only progress as a truly democratic nation once the Rulers were gone and Muslims were liberal.

That explains why the GoM bypassed the Conference of Rulers and quietly got Foreign Minister Dato’ Saifuddin Abdullah to sign the Statute of Rome.

The signing was a first step measure towards amending the Federal Constitution of Malaysia to phase out the Malay Rulers gradually.

Ironically, the US has itself rejected the ICC to safeguard its own soldiers from criminal prosecution.

What this means, is should US soldiers be accused of committing warcrimes in Afghanistan or elsewhere, the US government will protect them by refusing to let the ICC prosecute them.

And these are just soldiers we’re talking about, not US lawmakers, judges or even the US President.

And here we have the GoM working secretly to criminally prosecute the Yang di-Pertuan Agong at the ICC.

Can you not see the irony?

P/S: Kepada Ambiga dan pemimpin-pemimpin Pakatan, toksah jadi lembu-lembu tajaan US hingga langsung tak sedar diri. 

WASHINGTON: The International Criminal Court (ICC) has rejected its prosecutor’s request to investigate alleged war crimes in Afghanistan.

Court judges highlighted instability and the lack of co-operation with investigators in the country.

The ruling was hailed by US President Donald Trump as a “major international victory” but human rights group Amnesty International criticised it.

It comes a week after the US revoked ICC prosecutor Fatou Bensouda’s visa.

That was thought to have been in response to her request to investigate possible crimes committed by US forces in Afghanistan.

Explaining their unanimous decision, the three ICC pre-trial chamber judges said such an investigation “would not serve the interests of justice”.

Mr Trump said it was a victory “not only for these patriots, but for the rule of law”.

In his statement, he called the ICC “illegitimate” and said it would be met with a “swift and vigorous response” if it tried to prosecute citizens of the US or its allies.

Amnesty said the refusal to investigate was a “shocking abandonment of victims” that would “weaken the court’s already questionable credibility”.


Amnesty’s Biraj Patnaik said the decision would be seen as a “craven capitulation to Washington’s bullying”.

ICC prosecutors have been examining alleged abuses committed by all parties in Afghanistan’s long conflict for more than a decade.

A formal examination of potential crimes began in November 2017.

But while the court said there was “a reasonable basis” to believe crimes had occurred, judges said Afghanistan’s current situation “make the prospects for a successful investigation and prosecution extremely limited”.

They also cited the long period that had passed since the investigation began in 2006, and said the court needed to “use its resources prioritising activities that would have better chances to succeed”.

What is the ICC?

The court investigates and brings to justice people responsible for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, intervening when national authorities cannot or will not prosecute.

The ICC was established by a UN treaty in 2002, and has been ratified by 123 countries, including the UK.

However, several countries – including China, India, Russia and the US – have refused to join, while some African countries say the court is unfairly focused on Africans.

Why is the US opposed to it?

US administrations have long criticised the ICC, arguing its soldiers could become the subject of political lawsuits.

President Bill Clinton signed the treaty establishing the court before the end of his term in office, but Congress never ratified it.

While the UN at one point gave US troops immunity – after the country threatened to withdraw its troops from peacekeeping in Bosnia – this exemption was cancelled in June 2004, two months after pictures of US troops abusing Iraqi prisoners shocked the world.

Last September National Security Adviser John Bolton threatened the ICC with sanctions if they pursued cases against US citizens.




TELEGRAM: Raggie Jessy Rithaudeen

TWITTER: Raggie Jessy Rithaudeen

WEBSITE: raggiejessyrithaudeen.com