Robert Fisk investigates an alleged double standard over two prominent Libyans accused of crimes against humanity

There’s a spot of skulduggery going on in the International Criminal Court (ICC) at The Hague. Not to put too fine a point upon it, a lot of questions are being asked about why the worshipful judges have, at least publicly, demanded a trial in Europe for Saif el-Islam al-Gaddafi – son of the late Muammar – but have blithely accepted that the dictator’s ruthless security boss, Abdullah al-Senussi, should be tried in the militia-haunted chaos of Libya.

Was this because the court didn’t want to upset Libya’s anarchic authorities by insisting that it try both men at The Hague? Or is there an ulterior, far more sinister purpose: to prevent Senussi blurting out details in The Hague of his cosy relationship with Western security services when he was handling relations between Gaddafi, the CIA and MI6?

Ben Emmerson, who is Senussi’s UK counsel – and, by chance, the UN’s special rapporteur on counter-terrorism and human rights – has described this month’s pre-trial decision by the International Court to refuse to try Senussi in The Hague as “shocking and inexplicable” because there is “overwhelming evidence… that the Libyan justice system is in a state of total collapse and that it is incapable of conducting fair trials”

read more here ON THE INDEPENDENT: