"Look at all this intense work by the Americans, the informal consultations, the amendments, the amendments to amendments, the revisions, the new proposals, over and over again! It's all a thankless task, just for the good of the Conference!" he said.

"This conscientous work is indeed helping international peace and understanding," I could not help thinking. After all, isn't it true that now Iraq and Iran, India and Pakistan, Cuba and Syria, are all together, in one way or another, leaving their differences behind in the past, all for the sake of peace and justice?

"If that's obstructionism, long live obstructionism," Lonalon proclaimed loudly, attracting the attention of the many delegates and others drinking coffee at the lounge at 4 pm.

Affectionately, he spoke of the tireless efforts displayed by the legion of American lawyers present in Rome - and whose numbers alone prove how committed Washington is compared to say, Eritrea or Ethiopia, which sent only one delegate, as if one person could possibly be everywhere, 15 hours a day, and read the piles of documents being produced here by the hour.

"That is irresponsible - and poverty has nothing to do with it," Lonalon said, blushing with anger. "We are poor and we are here enduring the Roman heat, beyond the call of duty." Lonalon is just among the silent majority in this Conference, who really understand things but are reluctant to speak.

He gave me a good example of how an international penal body should work. "It's just a matter of watching the news. An effective and independent ICC would have immediately reacted to the Iraqi agression this week, when it turned its radars on when British and American planes were patrolling Iraqi air space, and opened a thorough investigation to find and try those responsible.

"The fact that they then quickly turned them off only made things worse: it's proof of their bad intentions. They should be forced by an international judge to pay back the missile fired by the Americans, taking into account that it missed the target and killed no one, and apologise to the victims, the pilots who most likely were reprimanded by their commanders." Lonalon emphasised.

Another example is the US proposal to exclude from war crimes those committed in defence of private property. It is, of course, the legitimate right to self-defence: private property is like a part of your body. Hence, it is more than that, it is your essence and that of your family. If a band of thugs comes and attempts to take over your property, wouldn't you use whatever you had at hand - including biological weapons, chemical grenades, landmines, nuclear missiles and laser beams?

But a Court controlled by who knows who would probably rule otherwise. It could even rule against common sense, blame the good guys and reward the bad ones, and turn any poor, dark-skinned country lost in the middle of nowhere into an equal. Is that right?

"That's what you have big powers for," Lonalon said, "to make law and enforce it for us, thank God."