Thanks, I was unaware of that.
How about the International Court of Justice? The state (Canada in this case) can bring forth a complaint on behalf of one its nationals. It seems to me he should have started with the actual state that tortured him, no? :-|
Why? He's a Canadian citizen that was treated unjustly in his own country.... Canada was a wiling partner in his torture. It seems painfully obvious (to most?) that there is nothing to gain from Syria.
From ICJ:
Syria is going to be a part of the ICJ process? Not likely! :roll:The Court is competent to entertain a dispute only if the States concerned have accepted its jurisdiction in one or more of the following ways:
- by entering into a special agreement to submit the dispute to the Court;
- by virtue of a jurisdictional clause, i.e., typically, when they are parties to a treaty containing a provision whereby, in the event of a dispute of a given type or disagreement over the interpretation or application of the treaty, one of them may refer the dispute to the Court;
- through the reciprocal effect of declarations made by them under the Statute whereby each has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court as compulsory in the event of a dispute with another State having made a similar declaration. A number of these declarations, which must be deposited with the United Nations Secretary-General, contain reservations excluding certain categories of dispute.