罗德·麦格克（ROD MCGUIRK）澳大利亚墨尔本报道——周一，三名澳大利亚上诉法院法官驳回了一名活动人士的里程碑式诉求，该诉求旨在就英国国王查尔斯三世涉嫌对原住民实施种族灭绝一事对其进行起诉。
ROD MCGUIRK MELBOURNE, Australia — Three Australian appellate judges on Monday rejected an activist’s landmark bid to prosecute Britain’s King Charles III over the alleged genocide of Indigenous people.
维多利亚州上诉法院的这一裁决意味着罗比·索普（Uncle Robbie Thorpe）在澳大利亚国内仅剩最后一种选择：申请向澳大利亚高等法院提起上诉。高等法院仅受理约10%的上诉许可申请。
The ruling by Victoria state’s Court of Appeal leaves Uncle Robbie Thorpe with one final domestic option: seeking permission to appeal to the High Court of Australia. The High Court accepts only about 10% of applications for leave to appeal.
澳大利亚原住民使用“叔叔”（uncle）和“阿姨”（aunt）等称呼，以表达对社区长者的尊重。
Indigenous Australians use the titles ‘uncle’ and ‘aunt’ as marks of respect for community elders.
68岁的克劳塔通加隆族（Krautatungalung）长者索普周一表示，他并不指望在澳大利亚获得公正的听证。在耗尽澳大利亚法院的所有法律途径后，他表示将把针对这位君主的指控提交至位于荷兰的国际刑事法院。
Thorpe, a 68-year-old elder of the Krautatungalung people, said Monday that he did not expect to receive a fair hearing in Australia. After exhausting his options in Australian courts, he said he would take his allegations against the monarch to the International Criminal Court in the Netherlands.
“国际刑事法院将揭露澳大利亚的真面目——一个谎话连篇、种族主义、非法占领并实施种族灭绝的国家，”索普说道。
“The International Criminal Court will expose Australia for what it really is — a lying, racist, illegal occupation committing genocide,” Thorpe said.
周一的裁决是索普自2023年开始尝试在墨尔本地方法院对英国君主提起私人诉讼以来的第三次法律败诉。
Monday’s ruling was Thorpe’s third legal defeat since he began trying in 2023 to launch a private prosecution against the monarch in Melbourne Magistrates’ Court.
他的诉讼指控称，身为澳大利亚国家元首的英国国王，连同澳大利亚政府及其机构，通过维持在众多社会经济指标上使原住民处于不利地位的制度，正在延续种族灭绝行为。
His case alleges that the king, who is also Australia’s head of state, along with the Australian government and its institutions, is perpetuating genocide by maintaining systems that disadvantage Indigenous people across numerous socioeconomic measures.
根据官方统计数据，澳大利亚原住民约占总人口的4%。与其他澳大利亚人相比，他们的寿命更短，健康状况更差，且更有可能入狱或失业。
Indigenous Australians make up about 4% of the population. They die younger , experience worse health outcomes and are more likely to be imprisoned or unemployed than other Australians, according to official statistics.
悉尼大学宪法学者安妮·图米（Anne Twomey）表示，英国君主在英国境内享有完全的刑事和民事豁免权。这种豁免权甚至比美国总统的豁免权更为广泛，因为它延伸到了超出官方权力范围的个人行为。
The British monarch is immune from all criminal and civil liability in the United Kingdom. This provides an immunity that is even broader than that of a U.S. president because it extends to personal acts that are outside official power, Sydney University constitutional lawyer Anne Twomey said.
在英国，国王享有的普通法豁免权很可能也被澳大利亚继承了。澳大利亚曾是英国的殖民地，至今仍承认英国君主为自己的国家元首。托米（Twomey）表示，她不知道澳大利亚是否曾对国王的普通法豁免权进行过任何法律上的检验。
The king’s common law immunity in Britain has likely been inherited by Australia, a former British colony that continues to recognize Britain’s monarch as its own head of state. Twomey said she is unaware of the monarch’s common law immunity ever being tested in Australia.
英国和澳大利亚的议会都有权通过立法来修改君主的豁免权。不过，英国君主同时也是加拿大、新西兰等国家的国家元首；根据国际习惯法以及澳大利亚的《外国国家豁免法》（1985年）和《外交特权与豁免法》（1967年），君主享有主权豁免权。
The British and Australian parliaments could legislate to alter a monarch’s immunity. But a British monarch is also the head of state of several countries including Canada and New Zealand. The monarch is entitled to sovereign immunity under customary international law and according to Australian statutes including the Foreign States Immunities Act 1985 and the Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities Act 1967.
国际刑事法院（ICC）并不承认国家元首的豁免权，并且有权对涉嫌种族灭绝的行为提起诉讼。
The International Criminal Court does not recognize head of state immunity and has the jurisdiction to prosecute on a charge of genocide.
不过，像索普（Thorpe）这样的人无法在国际刑事法院提起私人诉讼——尽管他曾在澳大利亚的低级法院尝试过这样做。
But an individual such as Thorpe does not have the option to launch a private prosecution in the ICC as he has attempted in a low-level Australian court.
澳大利亚国立大学的国际法专家唐·罗斯韦尔（Don Rothwell）指出：“联合国安理会可以提议对某人进行起诉，但英国会否决针对查尔斯国王的此类提案。”
The U.N. Security Council can refer a prosecution, but Britain would veto such a move against King Charles, Australian National University international lawyer Don Rothwell said.
最常见的做法是，个人将相关证据提交给国际刑事法院的检察官办公室；这曾在针对俄罗斯总统弗拉基米尔·普京和以色列总理本雅明·内塔尼亚胡的案件中发生过。
The most common path is for an individual to make the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor aware of evidence, as happened in cases against Russian President Vladimir Putin and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu .
罗斯韦尔表示：“个人无权自行提起诉讼。如果他们已经用尽了澳大利亚法律规定的所有救济途径，他们所能做的最多就是提供他们认为构成种族灭绝罪的证据。是否真的要提起诉讼，最终由国际刑事法院来决定。”
“An individual cannot commence a prosecution. If they’ve exhausted all of their options under Australian law, the best that they can do is seek to provide evidence that they believe constitutes the crime of genocide. It’s then up to the International Criminal Court to determine whether they would seek to prosecute,” Rothwell said.