A large section of the Belgian press also considers that Brussels has utterly capitulated.

The Law Which Allows it to Judge International Crimes Will be Amended

Belgium Forgoes its Role as "the World's Judge"

By Jean-Pierre De Staercke

AFTER several weeks' siege, the Belgian government has finished by giving in to international pressure, especially from Israel and the United States, to reduce the reach of its law of "universal competence" which was becoming diplomatically awkward.

Ten years after bestowing itself with legislation that was on the way to transforming Belgium into the "world's judge", the country has fallen back into line.

Unanimously passed by Parliament in 1993, this law set up Belgian courts as the world's policemen for the repression of the most serious crimes: genocide, crimes against humanity or international law, no matter where they were committed, no matter what the nationality of the victim or the criminal. Applauded by human rights organizations, this law allowed the condemnation two years ago in Brussels of four Rwandans who had participated in the 1994 genocide in their country. Also by virtue of this law, Belgium demanded the extradition two years ago of former Chilean dictator, Augusto Pinochet. The publicity surrounding these two matters brought in its wake more than thirty depositions in Brussels against foreign leaders, notably Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, pursued for his alleged role in the Sabra and Chatila massacres in Lebanon.

These waves of more or less well-founded complaints became more and more difficult to manage. Last week again, new complaints charged American President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair for their responsibility for the war in Iraq.

Three major amendments will be proposed to parliament as soon as the new government is constituted. First, the law will apply in the future only if the victim who deposes the complaint in Belgium is Belgian or has lived in Belgium for at least three years. Furthermore, the alleged author of the crime must also be Belgian or a resident for more than three years. The second major axis of the amendment: the complaint will be heard only if the country in which the alleged crimes were committed had no legislation to condemn them or cannot guarantee an equitable trial. Finally, the decision to hear the complaint will be made by the First President of the Brussels Appeal Court.

The criticisms of the proposed amendment are already legion and they come notably from Amnesty International and other international human rights organizations. "Excluding a complaint that involves a democratic country is going too far", because it establishes "a two weights, two measure policy" Human Rights Watch (HRW) regretted. One of its Belgian officials, Reef Brody, was sorry that "under the impact of irrational pressure from the United States, the Belgian government reneged on fundamental principles".

A large section of the Belgian press also considers that Brussels has utterly capitulated. The American threat was unambiguous: if the law was not annulled or changed in such a way that American officials no longer took a risk in traveling to Brussels, NATO institutions would be moved to another country.

The port of Antwerp was threatened with bankruptcy and its colossal diamond trade, the world's largest, was also on the scales. Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt, about to succeed himself, as well as Foreign Affairs Minister, Louis Michel, chose. The latter opined in an interview with Le Soir that the law would continue to "fully play its role" by "concentrating on those countries which do not enjoy equitable justice".

Translation: TruthOut French language correspondent Leslie Thatcher.

Daily Telegraph: Belgium restricts war crimes law