WesWorld

The Belgian representative states "Just as one wishes the Police to be accountable for excesses, it is reasonable to hold League of Nations troops to the rules of warfare to which their countries of origin are signatory.

Further, it is a dangerous precedent to allow troops to break the rules of war with no repercussions. If the lesson of Lithuania is that they are not accountable for their actions, how will the troops behave in the next deployment?

The Belgian nation continues to back the proposal, but can concede that all nations involved should be represented on the panel, to ensure that the hearings are fair and impartial. "



The Dutch and Kongo representatives continue to reserve comment.

Quoted

Originally posted by Kaiser Kirk
The Belgian representative states "Just as one wishes the Police to be accountable for excesses, it is reasonable to hold League of Nations troops to the rules of warfare to which their countries of origin are signatory.

Further, it is a dangerous precedent to allow troops to break the rules of war with no repercussions. If the lesson of Lithuania is that they are not accountable for their actions, how will the troops behave in the next deployment?

The Belgian nation continues to back the proposal, but can concede that all nations involved should be represented on the panel, to ensure that the hearings are fair and impartial."

(IC) Bulgarian representative:
"There has been no suggestion that troops who violate the established rules of war should escape without repercussions. It is merely the determination of the Bulgarian government that judging this matter is the responsibility of the country to whose army the accused belong, and is not the purview of the League of Nations. While the Kingdom of Bulgaria recognizes that not all nations may always apply the strictest standard of justice to their own troops, we are unwilling to expose our nation's troops to the potentially fickle politics of an international body, even one as august as the League."

(OOC) Actually, I looked up the dates and signatories of the Third Geneva Convention, and while Bulgaria signed the convention in 1929, it wasn't ratified until 1937.

Count Muata Ansika, delegate to the League of Nations from the Kingdom of the Kongo, takes the floor, speaking in good French.

"In 1884 an International body was held in Berlin, which settled the questions regarding colonization of Central Afrika. That international conference drew up a code of behavior, and granted control of the Kongo basin to Leopold II of Belgium.
Leopold II proceeded to ignore that code, and established his Force Publique to enslave, torture and maim us to obtain our labor in order to extract the wealth of our land.

<At this point the Count raises his left arm, displaying the stump of his wrist>

"This was the result of my village not meeting it's quota of Ivory. Four of our elders, including my father the chief, were shot and left for the animals. It has been forty years, but I remember that day clearly.

If I have it correct, that was the year Conrad's Heart of Darkness finally drew substantive international attention. But it was three years later, after the Casement report, that the Queen's Marines arrived to liberate us from the Force Publique.
The Force Publique did not leave without a fight, and none of you shall ever know the joy with which we received the rifles the Marines gave us, and how eagerly we hunted them down. I will admit that judicial proceedings were, shall we say, lacking.

No armed soldier should believe himself beyond retribution for his actions, whether in his own country, or a foreign one, at the behest of his monarch, or the International community.

The Armed forces of the Kongo have participated in League actions in Bolivia, and understand the potential for false, overblown or propaganda allegations. We recognize the Bulgarian concerns.
We believe there should be judicial safeguards so that soldiers are not treated as criminals for doing the hard tasks society demands of them, or for making decisions in the midst of combat. Only for crimes which were clearly such, and outside the maelstrom of combat, should there be review and potential punishment. However, we contend that judicial oversight should be that of the International body, in the clear public eye, not in the home country.

ooc: the interaction of OTL treaties with WW has always been a problem. We didn't discuss the 3rd Geneva, etc. Further many Nations here were colonies OTL, and so had no reason to sign. Makes it difficult.

Henrich Bruning, sitting as special ambassador to the League, attracted the attention of the President of the Assembly and having been given leave to do so, rose to take the rostrum.

“At the close of the Great War, the victorious Entente Powers demanded the trial of numerous German citizens for participation in alleged war crimes. Chief of these was the late Kaiser Wilhelm, who, having abdicated and taken refuge in the Netherlands, was given sanctuary and kept safe from prosecution by the neutrality of the Netherlands. Having failed to obtain the extradition of the late Kaiser, and having accepted the position of the German Government that is was quite capable of trying any alleged war criminals, the Entente Powers submitted to the German Government the names of those deemed culpable of war crimes – and these forty-five individuals were tried in 1921 before the German Supreme Court then sitting at Leipzig. The sentences of that court were found acceptable to the Entente Powers.”

He paused. “Germany maintains the same position now that it maintained then: that it is competent to try any German national accused of violation of the laws of war or of committing war crimes.”

The Belgian delegate glares at the Kongo and German representatives, rises to his feet, reconsiders and sits again.

It's a rough spot, the Person that shielded the Kaiser from answering for German atrocities in Belgium, and the Person that liberated Kongo from the Belgian King and his atrocities...is now Queen of Belgium