特朗普签署行政令:制裁国际刑事法院(附全文)

职场   2025-02-08 09:00   安徽  
点击“律师视野”    快速关注我们

来源|美国白宫官网、央视新闻(转自国际法务)
作者|同上


图片

国际刑事法院  资料图(视觉中国)


当地时间2月6日,美国白宫官网发布公告,美国总统特朗普签署一项行政命令,制裁国际刑事法院(ICC)据美国媒体报道,特朗普指责国际刑事法院不恰当地针对美国和以色列。特朗普上台后,美国宣布将退出了巴黎协定、联合国人权理事会、国际卫生组织,而这一次是制裁国际组织。


法务君迅速查阅了这份行政令的全文,该行政令是一份以唐纳德·特朗普名义发布的行政命令,宣布对国际刑事法院(ICC)实施制裁。行政令中,特朗普认为ICC在无合法依据的情况下,对美国和以色列人员展开调查并发布逮捕令 。特朗普认为美国和以色列都不是《罗马规约》缔约国,因此不受ICC管辖,也不认可ICC的管辖权,而ICC此举危及美相关人员安全,损害美国主权和外交政策,美国国会2002年也立法保护相关人员,所以美国决定制裁。行政令中公布的制裁措施包括资产冻结、捐赠限制、交易禁令、入境限制等。


此前,国际刑事法院对以色列和哈马斯高官发出逮捕令

2024年11月21日,国际刑事法院在海牙对以色列总理内塔尼亚胡、前国防部长加兰特,以及巴勒斯坦伊斯兰抵抗运动(哈马斯)军事指挥官穆罕默德·迪亚卜·易卜拉欣·马斯里发出逮捕令。


该法院在一份声明中说,内塔尼亚胡和加兰特被指控“自2023年10月8日到至少2024年5月20日期间犯有反人类罪和战争罪”。声明详细列举了他们被控的罪行,包括“故意针对平民发动袭击”,以及“故意剥夺加沙平民赖以生存的基本物资,包括食品、饮用水、药品、医疗用品、燃料和电力”等。


马斯里被指控自2023年10月7日起在以色列和巴勒斯坦境内犯下战争罪和反人类罪。


以下是特朗普行政令全文:


图片

IMPOSING SANCTIONS ON THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

EXECUTIVE ORDER

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) (IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) (NEA), section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (8 U.S.C. 1182(f)), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code,
I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, find that the International Criminal Court (ICC), as established by the Rome Statute, has engaged in illegitimate and baseless actions targeting America and our close ally Israel.  The ICC has, without a legitimate basis, asserted jurisdiction over and opened preliminary investigations concerning personnel of the United States and certain of its allies, including Israel, and has further abused its power by issuing baseless arrest warrants targeting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Former Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant.  The ICC has no jurisdiction over the United States or Israel, as neither country is party to the Rome Statute or a member of the ICC.  Neither country has ever recognized the ICC’s jurisdiction, and both nations are thriving democracies with militaries that strictly adhere to the laws of war.  The ICC’s recent actions against Israel and the United States set a dangerous precedent, directly endangering current and former United States personnel, including active service members of the Armed Forces, by exposing them to harassment, abuse, and possible arrest.  This malign conduct in turn threatens to infringe upon the sovereignty of the United States and undermines the critical national security and foreign policy work of the United States Government and our allies, including Israel.  Furthermore, in 2002, the Congress enacted the American Servicemembers’ Protection Act of 2002 (22 U.S.C. 7421 et seq.) to protect United States military personnel, United States officials, and officials and military personnel of certain allied countries against criminal prosecution by an international criminal court to which the United States is not party, stating, “In addition to exposing members of the Armed Forces of the United States to the risk of international criminal prosecution, the Rome Statute creates a risk that the President and other senior elected and appointed officials of the United States Government may be prosecuted by the International Criminal Court.” (22 U.S.C. 7421(9)).    

The United States unequivocally opposes and expects our allies to oppose any ICC actions against the United States, Israel, or any other ally of the United States that has not consented to ICC jurisdiction.  The United States remains committed to accountability and to the peaceful cultivation of international order, but the ICC and parties to the Rome Statute must respect the decisions of the United States and other countries not to subject their personnel to the ICC’s jurisdiction, consistent with their respective sovereign prerogatives.   


The United States will impose tangible and significant consequences on those responsible for the ICC’s transgressions, some of which may include the blocking of property and assets, as well as the suspension of entry into the United States of ICC officials, employees, and agents, as well as their immediate family members, as their entry into our Nation would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.  


I therefore determine that any effort by the ICC to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute protected persons, as defined in section 8(d) of this order, constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States, and I hereby declare a national emergency to address that threat.  I hereby determine and order:    


Section 1.  (a)  All property and interests in property that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person, of the following persons are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in:
(i)   the person listed in the Annex to this order; and
(ii)  any foreign person determined by the Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Attorney General:
(A)  to have directly engaged in any effort by the ICC to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute a protected person without consent of that person’s country of nationality;
(B)  to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, or technological support for, or goods or services to or in support of, any activity in subsection (a)(ii)(A) of this section or any person whose property or interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; or


(C)  to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any person whose property or interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order.
(b)  The prohibitions in subsection (a) of this section apply except to the extent provided by statutes, or in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this order, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted before the date of this order.

Sec. 2.  I hereby determine that the making of donations of the types of articles specified in section 203(b)(2) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(2)) by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to section 1 of this order would seriously impair my ability to address the national emergency declared in this order, and I hereby prohibit such donations as provided by section 1 of this order.

Sec. 3.  The prohibitions in section 1(a) of this order include:
(a)  the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to section 1 of this order; and 

(b)  the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person.

Sec. 4.  The unrestricted immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens determined to meet one or more of the criteria in section 1 of this order, as well as immediate family members of such aliens, or aliens determined by the Secretary of State to be employed by, or acting as an agent of, the ICC, would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and the entry of such persons into the United States, as immigrants or nonimmigrants, is hereby suspended, except where the Secretary of State determines that the entry of the person into the United States would not be contrary to the interests of the United States, including when the Secretary of State so determines, based on a recommendation of the Attorney General, that the person’s entry would further important United States law enforcement objectives.  In exercising this responsibility, the Secretary of State shall consult with the Secretary of Homeland Security on matters related to admissibility or inadmissibility within the authority of the Secretary of Homeland Security.  Such persons shall be treated as persons covered by section 1 of Proclamation 8693 of July 24, 2011 (Suspension of Entry of Aliens Subject to United Nations Security Council Travel Bans and International Emergency Economic Powers Act Sanctions).  The Secretary of State shall have the responsibility for implementing this section pursuant to such conditions and procedures as the Secretary of State has established or may establish pursuant to Proclamation 8693.

Sec. 5.  Within 60 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall submit to the President a report on additional persons that should be included within the scope of section 1 of this order.

Sec. 6.  (a)  Any transaction that evades or avoids, has the purpose of evading or avoiding, causes a violation of, or attempts to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.
(b)  Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.

Sec. 7.  Nothing in this order shall prohibit transactions for the conduct of the official business of the Federal Government by employees, grantees, or contractors thereof.

Sec. 8.  For the purposes of this order:
(a)  the term “person” means an individual or entity;
(b)  the term “entity” means a government or instrumentality of such government, partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, group, subgroup, or other organization;
(c)  the term “United States person” means any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including a foreign branch, subsidiary, or employee of such entity), or any person lawfully in the United States;
(d)  the term “protected person” means:
(i)   any United States person, unless the United States provides formal consent to ICC jurisdiction over that person or becomes a state party to the Rome Statute, including:
(A)  current or former members of the Armed Forces of the United States;
(B)  current or former elected or appointed officials of the United States Government; and
(C)  any other person currently or formerly employed by or working on behalf of the United States Government; and
(ii)  any foreign person that is a citizen or lawful resident of an ally of the United States that has not consented to ICC jurisdiction over that person or is not a state party to the Rome Statute, including:
(A)  current or former members of the armed forces of such ally of the United States;
(B)  current or former elected or appointed government officials of such ally of the United States; and
(C)  any other person currently or formerly employed by or working on behalf of such a government;
(e)  the term “ally of the United States” means:
(i)   a government of a member country of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization; or
(ii)  a government of a “major non-NATO ally,” as that term is defined by section 2013(7) of the American Servicemembers’ Protection Act of 2002 (22 U.S.C. 7432(7));
(f)  the term “immediate family member” means a spouse or child;
(g)  the term “alien” has the meanings given to the term in section 101(a)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(3)); and
(h)  the term “foreign person” means a person that is not a United States person.

Sec. 9.  For those persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States, I find that because of the ability to transfer funds or other assets instantaneously, prior notice to such persons of measures to be taken pursuant to section 1 of this order would render those measures ineffectual.  I therefore determine that for these measures to be effective in addressing the national emergency declared in this order, there need be no prior notice of a listing or determination made pursuant to section 1 of this order.

Sec. 10.  The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to take such actions, including adopting rules and regulations, and to employ all powers granted to the President by IEEPA as may be necessary to implement this order. The Secretary of the Treasury may, consistent with applicable law, redelegate any of these functions within the Department of the Treasury.  All executive departments and agencies of the United States shall take all appropriate measures within their authority to implement this order.

Sec. 11.  The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State, is hereby authorized to submit recurring and final reports to the Congress on the national emergency declared in this order, consistent with section 401(c) of the NEA (50 U.S.C. 1641(c)) and section 204(c) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1703(c)).

Sec. 12.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.


———  END  ———


特别声明

本文仅为作者本人观点,不代表本公众号意见,也不构成对相关案件或事件的意见和建议。本公众号发布的转载作品,是出于传递信息及学习、研究或欣赏的目的,如图文来源标记有误或涉嫌侵权,请联系我们更正或删除。


往期精彩回顾

张智然律师的部分原创文章


1.刑辩律师应首先考虑作无罪辩护

2.从“唐山打人案”,看法律信仰的重塑

3.写在劳荣枝案二审宣判之前

4.正当防卫若干问题的法律思考——以昆山砍人案和山东辱母案为例

5.一起涉黑案件的成功辩护(附:辩护词)

6.从一起检察院作减轻抗诉后二审加重被告人刑罚的案件,看我国的司法程序公正

7.作为被告人王振华的辩护律师,你可以这么认为,但你不可以这么说!

8.海外出版的方方日记,会成为西方向中国政府索赔的证据吗?

9.聂树斌的“冤死”与王书金的“赖活”

10.十堰法官被刺事件的思考

11.从雷洋之死,看我国收容教育制度的存废

12.武昌砍头案嫌疑人胡某“持证杀人”不用承担刑事责任吗?

13.法官担任县委法律顾问之弊

14.“假结婚”和“假离婚”方式购房的法律风险

15.司法统一之前施行司法责任制真的是一场灾难吗?—— 与俞江教授商榷

16.也谈“偷换店家收款二维码案”行为的定性

17.《最高法对“取得实习证的实习律师是否可以到法院立案”问题的答复》一文之刍议

18.从一起盗窃案的辩护,浅析涉案物品价格鉴定的质证要素

19.法官王桂荣的行为构成玩忽职守罪?

20.辩护词选登|谁是这起爆炸案的元凶?

21.也谈与智障女同居期间性行为的定性 —— 与石经海、谷君二位老师商榷

22.用近亲属的医保卡开药构成诈骗罪?

23.《人民的名义》股权质押相关问题的法律解读及纠偏

24.辩护词选登|彭某“吸毒”后无意识杀死朋友4岁儿子,其刑事责任能力如何认定?

25.“辱母案”于欢的防卫行为并未过当,其性质属于正当防卫

26.微型小说| 开庭

27.李国庆“抢公章”的行为是否有效?到底谁能代表当当?

28.王宝强的离婚声明涉嫌名誉侵权 ——浅析王宝强离婚声明涉及到的法律问题

请点击👇下方名片关注关联公众号,加星标★


律师视野
弘扬法治精神,传递律师声音,提供法律服务。
 最新文章