Buying the law

America is internationally renowned for its obsession with the law. We like legality. In no other country can you sue somebody for such a wide variety of complaints as you can in America. Whether it be this, that or the other thing, we've never had a problem with making a buck off of justice.\nBut our obsession doesn't stop there. Not only do we use the judicial system for profit, we are also addicted to catching the bad guys. How else can you explain the success of the television show "COPS," or account for the Bureau of Justice Statistics' claim that 6.7 million Americans were either on probation, in prison or paroled by the end of 2002?\nAdmit it, we are addicted to prosecution.\nHowever, like so many other things, America doesn't want to let anybody else share in the fun. We won't let anybody else say we're being naughty. It might be embarrassing.\nThis became clear back in 1998 when America sided with Libya, Algeria and China (all well-known for their human-rights records) against the inception of the International Criminal Court. When delegates from the United Nations put it to a vote, we lost 120 to 7 with 21 abstentions, according to the ICC Web site.\nA Boston Globe article -- published July 18, 1998 -- reported that one of America's qualms with such a court is that Americans might have to answer to it. "The United States ... sought to exempt its own agents and servicemen from much of the court's reach," it said.\nI understand that it is the government's duty to protect its citizenry. But from a court that is, according to the same article, "aimed at deterring -- and punishing -- those who commit genocide, war crimes, crimes of aggression and crimes against humanity?"\nIt doesn't matter if you are a civilian or the president of the United States. If a country thinks you should be charged with crimes against humanity, you need to go to court for it.\nI come from a country where it is acceptable for attorney Ken Nunn to sue two IU students for $10,000 over his broken lawn lights (November 2001). I have no sympathy for genocidal maniacs.\nYet America refuses to hold itself accountable. Since we can't stop the court from doing its job, we've taken the tactic of buying immunity from other countries. Last Wednesday, we added Colombia to our list of 61 other nations where we can abuse people without fear of repercussions (The New York Times, Friday).\nThis seems odd because Colombia is one of 92 countries that ratified the ICC statute. So how did we get a country to go against a court it helped to create?\nSimple!The Times notes we threatened to withhold $130 million in aid if it didn't go along.\nNo matter how powerful America is, we need to maintain some sense of morality. If an individual does something heinous enough to be brought before a war crimes court, then we should be the ones to put him on the plane.\nIn a moment of irony, page three, paragraph six of my U.S. passport reads as follows: "Foreign laws: Remember, while in a foreign country, you are subject to its laws. Penalties for violating local law, even unknowingly, can be more severe than in the U.S. for similar offenses."\nThe Department of State somehow thinks these words of wisdom do not apply to international law as well.