THE MODUS OPERANDI AND CRITIQUES OF THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT (ICC) (original) (raw)

Objectives of International Criminal Law and Jurisdiction of ICC

Sociology and Anthropology, 2015

Although roots of criminal prosecutions are traced back in the 17 th and 18 th century but newly emerged discipline of international law namely international criminal law gained its scope after adoption Rome Statute. However, statute has not yet been universally accepted and various discrepancies have been raised by various states regarding the Jurisdiction and applicable procedure of International Criminal Court (ICC). Prior to the establishment of ICC, initially various international tribunals were established for the prosecutions of perpetrators of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and aggression, particularly after World War II. However, the prosecutions were subjected to serious criticism not only by the states representing the accused persons rather by the prosecuting states as well, on the grounds that all the prosecutions were partial in nature and even the same crimes were committed by the prosecution states but not a single individual was subjected to prosecutions from within the prosecuting states. Thereafter, instances have been reported of individual prosecutions till two decades back when again certain individuals including the heads of states were prosecuted for their alleged crimes, including genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. All these events and previous prosecutions resulted in establishment of ICC, but the statute has not yet been ratified by most of the states on a number of reasons and the most relevant of them is the jurisdiction of the court. Although, all the concepts and types of jurisdiction are not controversial but most of the concerns have been shown regarding the universal jurisdiction of ICC, and all the related concepts which provide the action of a state outside the jurisdiction of a states.

DOI: 10.13189/sa.2015.030303 Objectives of International Criminal Law and Jurisdiction of ICC

2016

Although roots of criminal prosecutions are traced back in the 17th and 18th century but newly emerged discipline of international law namely international criminal law gained its scope after adoption Rome Statute. However, statute has not yet been universally accepted and various discrepancies have been raised by various states regarding the Jurisdiction and applicable procedure of International Criminal Court (ICC). Prior to the establishment of ICC, initially various international tribunals were established for the prosecutions of perpetrators of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and aggression, particularly after World War II. However, the prosecutions were subjected to serious criticism not only by the states representing the accused persons rather by the prosecuting states as well, on the grounds that all the prosecutions were partial in nature

Overview and Significance of the International Criminal Court (ICC)

A Brief History of International Criminal Law and International Criminal Court, 2017

Established as an intergovernmental organization, the International Criminal Court (the ICC or "the Court") is specifically designed to deal with the international crimes that are thought to be most severe and serious. It has generally been observed that the commissions of those crimes had gone unpunished, making the impunity of the perpetrators a usual and ordinary practice in international relations. Although the idea that a permanent international criminal court is strongly needed, and therefore, should be created, lingered for a very long time, the realization of that idea has become quite recently. Nation-states, the major and primary actors of the international system, have generally been lenient, if not reluctant, in addressing those kinds of acts. Particularly, concerns over sovereign rights of the states have made them reluctant to get together to discuss the issue up until 1998. Since sovereignty has been the underlying principle in the operation of the international system that is generally believed to be built by sovereign nation-states, states have long refrained from dealing with the issues pertinent to even the gravest crimes in order to show their tribute to the principle of nonintervention. As a consequence, apart from a few examples, human rights issues in

Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court

Conscious that all peoples are united by common bonds, their cultures pieced together in a shared heritage, and concerned that this delicate mosaic may be shattered at any time, Mindful that during this century millions of children, women and men have been victims of unimaginable atrocities that deeply shock the conscience of humanity, Recognizing that such grave crimes threaten the peace, security and well-being of the world, Affirming that the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole must not go unpunished and that their effective prosecution must be ensured by taking measures at the national level and by enhancing international cooperation, Determined to put an end to impunity for the perpetrators of these crimes and thus to contribute to the prevention of such crimes, Recalling that it is the duty of every State to exercise its criminal jurisdiction over those responsible for international crimes, Reaffirming the Purposes and Principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and in particular that all States shall refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations, Emphasizing in this connection that nothing in this Statute shall be taken as authorizing any State Party to intervene in an armed conflict or in the internal affairs of any State, Determined to these ends and for the sake of present and future generations, to establish an independent permanent International Criminal Court in relationship with the United Nations system, with jurisdiction over the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, Emphasizing that the International Criminal Court established under this Statute shall be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions, Resolved to guarantee lasting respect for and the enforcement of international justice, Have agreed as follows: PART 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COURT Article 1 The Court An International Criminal Court ("the Court") is hereby established. It shall be a permanent institution and shall have the power to exercise its jurisdiction over persons for the most serious crimes of international concern, as referred to in this Statute, and shall be complementary to national criminal jurisdictions. The jurisdiction and functioning of the Court shall be governed by the provisions of this Statute.

The arbitrary circumscription of the jurisdiction of the international criminal court

Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 2019

As it is currently legally constituted, the International Criminal Court has no jurisdiction over the world's most important military powers-United States, China and Russia-for the most serious crimes that can be committed in the international system (unless their members commit the crimes on the territory of a state that has ratified the ICC). It is hard to see the restricted jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court as anything other than the bald placing of the most powerful members of the international political community above the law while the rest of the community remains subject to it. At the same time, one essential element of the legitimacy of the International Criminal Court is that it is founded on state consent. But this does not get the International Criminal Court entirely off the hook. I will argue that the circumscription of the jurisdiction of the court is arbitrary and in violation of fundamental norms of justice and that this threatens the legitimacy of the Court. We are facing a legitimacy dilemma between the need for state participation in the creation of international law and the requirements of the rule of law.