AXJ TO FILE A CRIMINAL COMPLAINT AGAINST 1% ELITE IN THE HAGUE

AXJ TO FILE A CRIMINAL COMPLAINT AGAINST 1% ELITE IN THE HAGUE




International Criminal Court
Oude Waalsdorperweg 10, 2597 AK Den Haag, Netherlands
https://www.icc-cpi.int/contact
Tel. + 31 (0)70 515 8515
Fax + 31 (0)70 515 8555

Re: Communications to the International Criminal Court

AXJ NEWS - DEN HAAG -NL 02.12.2017 12:58:36

The Independent International Civil and Political Human Rights Organization known as Actions for Justice and Peace ( AXJ ), with over one million Members world wide, has just announced that it will be filing a criminal complaint against the 1% wealthiest human beings for fraud and misappropriation of natural resources around the world, considered to be crimes against humanity. 

COMPLAINT

In the complaint draft forwarded to AXJ NEWS, the oldest non profit Human Rights Organization ( HRO ) on the internet argues that these human beings "have directly or indirectly unlawfully acquired financial and personal interests in the natural resources of the world, and have exploited the rest of mankind in the process". The first draft we have had access to is over 1,000 pages long and refers to to evidence that is globally accessible via the internet. ( Article 69: Evidence )

Article 5: Crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court
1. The jurisdiction of the Court shall be limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole. The Court has jurisdiction in accordance with this Statute with respect to the following crimes:
(a) The crime of genocide;
(b) Crimes against humanity;
(c) War crimes;
(d) The crime of aggression.
2. The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression once a provision is adopted in accordance with articles 121 and 123 defining the crime and setting out the conditions under which the Court shall exercise jurisdiction with respect to this crime. Such a provision shall be consistent with the relevant provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.

Article 7: Crimes against humanity

Article 8: War crimes

Article 8 bis: Crime of aggression

LAND, REAL ESTATE, FINANCIAL SECTOR, FOOD PRODUCTION AND MINERAL RIGHTS

First on the complaint appear all land owners around the world and the exploitation of mineral rights which belong to the Peoples of the world and not private owners. The list is very extensive but the names ultimately appearing behind the umbrella of all the shell and straw companies are relatively few. The veil will be pierced in the complaint since we are talking about crimes against humanity and the prosecutors do have competent jurisdiction to commence discovery. (*)

ENERGY AND TRANSPORTATION

In the chapter regarding Energy sources, there is a strong emphasis on the fact that electrical energy was made available and possible to mass production scale with the inventions of Tesla back at the beginning of the 20th century. The grids were created, electrical transportation and vehicles were being produced but discontinued, as a consequence of the multi-billion dollar fuel sources based on petroleum rather than alternative energies. Special mention has been made of the lobbies in the capital of the United States.

INTERNET & INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

We also understand that the owners of operating systems such as MS-DOS had signed contracts with IBM and that should never have been permitted them to "extort" users into paying for their operating systems. Since the Personal Computer ( PC ) was developed, many far more secure and free operating systems were created around UNIX ( ie Linux, et al ), ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix ) and were not permitted nor allowed to be downloaded from the internet. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_PC_DOS )

In fact, the complaint argues that the wide spread plague of internet virus is all a creation of the most used operating system on PCs in the world. In fact, at one point in the well written complaint, the lawsuit argues that certain internet software companies and even hardware manufactures implanted software and conspired against internet users to steal their personal information via "cookies" and other means. Therefore they are the only ones responsible and should be held accountable for the creation, propagation, and installation of those virus themselves, and then selling anti-virus to those same users. It goes on to name a few companies such as Mail.Ru, etc. with evidence attached. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux )

Another part of the massive complaint goes on to deal with the massive misinformation published on the internet by certain Governments and drags them into the complaint as Defendants.

To read more about this complaint please stay tuned to AXJ NEWS via any free access to the internet.

www.axj.com

International Criminal Court
Oude Waalsdorperweg 10 
2597 AK The Hague 
Telephone: 070 - 515 85 15
Website: International Criminal Court

(*) Article 15: Prosecutor

1. The Prosecutor may initiate investigations proprio motu on the basis of information on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court.
2. The Prosecutor shall analyse the seriousness of the information received. For this purpose, he or she may seek additional information from States, organs of the United Nations, intergovernmental or non-governmental organizations, or other reliable sources that he or she deems appropriate, and may receive written or oral testimony at the seat of the Court.
3. If the Prosecutor concludes that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation, he or she shall submit to the Pre-Trial Chamber a request for authorization of an investigation, together with any supporting material collected. Victims may make representations to the Pre-Trial Chamber, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure and Evidence.
4. If the Pre-Trial Chamber, upon examination of the request and the supporting material, considers that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation, and that the case appears to fall within the jurisdiction of the Court, it shall authorize the commencement of the investigation, without prejudice to subsequent determinations by the Court with regard to the jurisdiction and admissibility of a case.
5. The refusal of the Pre-Trial Chamber to authorize the investigation shall not preclude the presentation of a subsequent request by the Prosecutor based on new facts or evidence regarding the same situation.
6. If, after the preliminary examination referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, the Prosecutor concludes that the information provided does not constitute a reasonable basis for an investigation, he or she shall inform those who provided the information. This shall not preclude the Prosecutor from considering further information submitted to him or her regarding the same situation in the light of new facts or evidence.

Article 15 bis: Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (State referral, proprio motu)

1. The Court may exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with article 13, paragraphs (a) and (c), subject to the provisions of this article.
2. The Court may exercise jurisdiction only with respect to crimes of aggression committed one year after the ratification or acceptance of the amendments by thirty States Parties.
3. The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with this article, subject to a decision to be taken after 1 January 2017 by the same majority of States Parties as is required for the adoption of an amendment to the Statute.
4. The Court may, in accordance with article 12, exercise jurisdiction over a crime of aggression, arising from an act of aggression committed by a State Party, unless that State Party has previously declared that it does not accept such jurisdiction by lodging a declaration with the Registrar. The withdrawal of such a declaration may be effected at any time and shall be considered by the State Party within three years.
5. In respect of a State that is not a party to this Statute, the Court shall not exercise its jurisdiction over the crime of aggression when committed by that State's nationals or on its territory.
6. Where the Prosecutor concludes that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation in respect of a crime of aggression, he or she shall first ascertain whether the Security Council has made a determination of an act of aggression committed by the State concerned. The Prosecutor shall notify the Secretary-General of the United Nations of the situation before the Court, including any relevant information and documents.
7. Where the Security Council has made such a determination, the Prosecutor may proceed with the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression.
8. Where no such determination is made within six months after the date of notification, the Prosecutor may proceed with the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression, provided that the Pre-Trial Division has authorized the commencement of the investigation in respect of a crime of aggression in accordance with the procedure contained in article 15, and the Security Council has not decided otherwise in accordance with article 16.
9. A determination of an act of aggression by an organ outside the Court shall be without prejudice to the Court's own findings under this Statute.
10. This article is without prejudice to the provisions relating to the exercise of jurisdiction with respect to other crimes referred to in article 5.

Article 15 ter: Exercise of jurisdiction over the crime of aggression (Security Council referral)

1. The Court may exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with article 13, paragraph (b), subject to the provisions of this article.
2. The Court may exercise jurisdiction only with respect to crimes of aggression committed one year after the ratification or acceptance of the amendments by thirty States Parties.
3. The Court shall exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression in accordance with this article, subject to a decision to be taken after 1 January 2017 by the same majority of States Parties as is required for the adoption of an amendment to the Statute.
4. A determination of an act of aggression by an organ outside the Court shall be without prejudice to the Court's own findings under this Statute.
5. This article is without prejudice to the provisions relating to the exercise of jurisdiction with respect to other crimes referred to in article 5.

Article 16: Deferral of investigation or prosecution

No investigation or prosecution may be commenced or proceeded with under this Statute for a period of 12 months after the Security Council, in a resolution adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, has requested the Court to that effect; that request may be renewed by the Council under the same conditions.

Sources : https://www.icc-cpi.int

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Rome_Statute_of_the_International_Criminal_Court#Article_5:_Crimes_within_the_jurisdiction_of_the_Court

Treaty bodies are Committees composed of independent experts who monitor the implementation of nine human rights treaties. Each of these treaties provides for the possibility for individuals to submit a complaint if they believe their right guaranteed in the treaty has been violated. This possibility is though only open to you if the perpetrating state has 1) ratified the treaty that protects the relevant right and 2) accepted the competence of the Committee to receive individual complaints. A state can accept this competence either through ratifying an additional optional protocol to the treaty (CESCR, CCPR, CEDAW, CRC and CED) or through issuing a declaration under the article providing for the competence of the treaty body to receive individual complaints (CERD, CAT, CMW and CED). Before filing a complaint to a treaty body, you must have exhausted domestic remedies, and a Committee will not accept your complaint has already been submitted to another international complaints mechanism. Petitions with treaty bodies usually take time, yet if successful, they yield a result that is binding.

[*]Applicability to states: Only to states that have ratified the relevant treaty and have accepted the competence of the treaty body to consider individual complaints (through ratifying an optional protocol or making a declaration in that sense).
[*]Applicable law: All the rights guaranteed within the relevant human rights treaty.
[*]Exhaustion of domestic remedies required: Yes.
[*]Possibility to simultaneously seize other international mechanisms: Only special procedures.
[*]Rapidity of reaction: Takes time (several years). Yet possibility for the treaty body to request interim measures to prevent irreparable harm. Some treaty bodies also have the possibility to conduct inquiries.
[*]Nature of the result: Binding.
[*]Feedback: Petitioner is informed of registration of his case and can comment on State's observation regarding admissibility of the case as well as its merits.
[*]Publicity: Conclusions or views are published.
[*]Who can submit a complaint? : Victim(s) and individuals or groups acting on their behalf (varies from one treaty body to another). Requirement for written consent of the victim, except for special circumstances.
[*]Submit your complaint to: Model complaint form, tbpetitions(at)ohchr.org, Fax for urgent matters: +41 22 917 90 22
[*] Mandat International - Chemin du Champ-Baron 3 - 1209 Geneva - Phone +41 (0)22 774 42 22 - Email: