Is Egypt, Mursi open to ICC Prosecution over Benghazi?

By Bob Michael

Recently, I wrote a piece on the murder of our American compatriots and Ambassador in Benghazi, Libya on September 11, 2012. In that writing I asserted that American government persons were guilty as principals in those murders. At the time of the writing the on-scene co-principals of our government were not known to me as the American government personnel aided in the escape and blocking of identity of the on-scene murder principals.

Subsequently, through the efforts of the Libyan government, and Walid Shoebat and his team, the actual terrorist principals have been identified. (If you do not understand what is meant by principals click here for an explanation.) There are actually three different sets of principals who, under the law of most jurisdictions, are all equally guilty of the murders.

Many, if not all, of the on-scene principals who did the actual killing were arrested and identified as members of the Egyptian jihadist group, Ansar al-Sharia. With this last part of the puzzle (Click here for the identifying by the Libyan government of the Egyptian off-scene principals) in place we see there are three distinct sets of murder principals (meaning in law that all are equally murderers).

Chronologically, the first set of principals are the Egyptians, including the Muslim Brotherhood-connected Egyptian president (at the time), Mohammed Mursi. These Egyptians set the events in motion by intricate involvement, as the Libyan government sets forth.

The on-scene principals who actually carried out the kidnapping / killing are the second set of principals. It makes little difference legally whether the intent originally was to kill or kidnap. Even an unintended killing during a kidnapping is elevated by the felony murder doctrine or rule, to murder by virtue of a death occurring during a kidnapping.

The third group of principals are those in the American government, who knowing of the events taking place in Benghazi, interceded on behalf of the attacking murderers, by preventing assistance to those being murdered, thus operating as a sort of military blocking force, or rear guard, to allow the on-scene murderers to escape unidentified.

So where does that leave us? I contacted the Libyan government after the murders and at the time when there was a change in presidents in Libya. I urged them to pursue prosecution of those responsible or to turn the evidence over to the International Criminal Court (ICC), if only to seek counsel from them. It should be noted that Egypt is a signatory to the Rome Statute which created the ICC. Thus, though neither the United States nor Libya is under the ICC jurisdiction, it would seem that Egypt is subject, and thus the ICC can take jurisdiction. I have not yet heard back from the Libyan government.

Already in Jail, should the International Criminal Court prosecute Mursi over Benghazi?

Already in Jail, should the International Criminal Court prosecute Mursi over Benghazi?

Even though the United States has signed the treaty (Bill Clinton signed on December 31, 2000), President George W. Bush in 2002 advised the United Nations that the U.S. was withdrawing its signature and would not be subject to the ICC jurisdiction.

This leaves us with ICC as having signatory jurisdiction over Egypt, and then the ICC considering if the event falls within the ICC jurisdiction. The second question, Walid Shoebat has asked: Where are the persons whom the Libyans arrested?

We must pursue that question vigorously.

I intend to pursue the bringing of the Egyptian government before the ICC if it accepts jurisdiction. As for Libya, I’ll continue in contact. And regards to the United States government, which is obviously complicit, we must go directly to the people, however we can accomplish that. The Obama government (and Obama is simply the face of a far larger crowd, including Hillary dodging sniper bullets) needs to be corralled. They won’t go to the barn willingly but need to be herded nonetheless.

As I put on my back page of my last book, Abraham Lincoln said in a speech on January 27, 1838, in Springfield, Illinois:

“Is it unreasonable then to expect that some man possessed to its utmost stretch, will at some time, spring up among us (not from us)? And when such an one does, it will require the people to be united with each other, attached to the government and laws, and generally intelligent, to successfully frustrate his designs.”

I don’t believe the people are united, or generally intelligent. That leads us only to the legal citizens who are patriots.

Stay tuned as it’s heating up.

Bob Michael is a retired Los Angeles Police Captain. Prior to retirement he commanded a detective division of approximately 100 detectives, including 15 homicide detectives who investigated 100 homicides a year. He has authored several political and law enforcement books, testified as an expert witness in high profile cases, and was a member of state mandated training boards.


, , , ,