PUBLIC LAW 107-206—AUG. 2, 2002 116 STAT. 899 methodology used to identify the offices, accounts, and amounts to be reduced. SEC. 1404. Any amount appropriated in this Act for which availability is made contingent by a provision of this Act on designation by the President as an emergency requirement pursuant to the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 shall not be available for obligation unless all such contingent amounts are designated by the President, within 30 days of enactment of this Act, as such emergency requirements. TITLE II—AMERICAN SERVICE- MEMBERS' PROTECTION ACT American Servicemembers' Protection Act of 2002. SEC. 2001. SHORT TITLE. 22 USC 7401 This title may be cited as the "American Servicemembers' Protection Act of 2002". SEC. 2002. FINDINGS. 22 USC 7421. Congress makes the following findings: (1) On July 17, 1998, the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, meeting in Rome, Italy, adopted the "Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court". The vote on whether to proceed with the statute was 120 in favor to 7 against, with 21 countries abstaining. The United States voted against final adoption of the Rome Statute. (2) As of April 30, 2001, 139 countries had signed the Rome Statute and 30 had ratified it. Pursuant to Article 126 of the Rome Statute, the statute will enter into force on the first day of the month after the 60th day following the date on which the 60th country deposits an instrument ratifying the statute. (3) Since adoption of the Rome Statute, a Preparatory Commission for the International Criminal Court has met regularly to draft documents to implement the Rome Statute, including Rules of Procedure and Evidence, Elements of Crimes, and a definition of the Crime of Aggression. (4) During testimony before the Congress following the adoption of the Rome Statute, the lead United States negotiator, Ambassador David Scheffer stated that the United States could not sign the Rome Statute because certain critical negotiating objectives of the United States had not been achieved. As a result, he stated: "We are left with consequences that do not serve the cause of international justice.". (5) Ambassador Scheffer went on to tell the Congress that: "Multinational peacekeeping forces operating in a country that has joined the treaty can be exposed to the Court's jurisdiction even if the country of the individual peacekeeper has not joined the treaty. Thus, the treaty purports to establish an arrangement whereby United States armed forces operating overseas could be conceivably prosecuted by the international court even if the United States has not agreed to be bound by the treaty. Not only is this contrary to the most fundamental principles of treaty law, it could inhibit the ability of the United States to use its military to meet alliance obligations and participate
�
