The Effectiveness Of International Criminal Court

INTRODUCTION

In our society, are we safe? Do we have anyone to hear us, or do us justice? I'm afraid we never talked about it, but it seems like a key concern for everybody. The present world is pounded with demonstrations of fear-based oppression like those of viciousness, fatalities, atrocious crimes, corruption and bribery, individuals misusing their authority, and so forth., which poses a question for us if we still live in an impartial society (Sahai,2015). In order to protect these crimes, violations and their victims, now and in the future, a global network is emerging along with human rights organizations by forming an international treaty in 1998 (International Criminal Court,2002) . This global arrangement authoritatively happened in 2002 subsequent to being sanctioned by a few nations and setting up as an International Criminal Court or commonly called as ICC. The ICC itself is different in a way that, by working closely with the United Nations, it is formed by a treaty. ICC seeks nothing other than individual citizens of countries or organizations (International Criminal Court,2002).

The question arises here whether ICC is successful in bringing justice to the people? Whether the ICC uses all its powers to protect the country's individuals? Violation against human rights like terrorism and certain other atrocities makes ICC accountable to add value and convict the accused individuals. In a way that in case the national government is incapable to supply an arrangement to a case, it at that point comes beneath this court but only the violations conducted in regions that have confirmed the settlement and by the residents of that country (Sahai,2015). Additionally, this court as well holds a few other hindrances like its’s as it was confined to oversee with cases or infringement that are committed after July1,2002 (Sahai,2015). As of now it is evident that if the participation ratio of all the nations is less or equal to none, the proceedings that the ICC will prosecute will have a partial judgement (Sahai,2015). ICC has very little, if any, to talk about the authority. The court is highly dependent on the police system of nations to make any investigations as they have none that has been a major disadvantage to the ICC and other member countries (Sahai,2015).For instance, states and investors are profoundly involved in indicting those blamed for crimes within the ICC, while the member nations did not bolster his detainment in a circumstance where Sudan’s leader Omar-al-Bashir was anticipated to be kept (Sahai,2015).

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place an order

ICC BIASNESS TOWARDS CERTAIN NATIONS

Talking about biasness it is quite clear now that the legally binding nations or the UN Security Council provide the prosecutors with the cases where, in my eyes, I would say it is an act of prejudice underneath the court decision because these ratified states have a high stake in the selection of ICC judiciary for their welfare . The question here next comes is what all nations are not a part of ICC ? China, United States, India, Pakistan, Indonesia, and Turkey, even though one of the most dominant nations, have no role to play in the ICC charter (Sahai,2015). There are still countless cases remaining that have not been taken to discipline until now or a significant gap has occurred since the incident took place in a long way. For example: in October 2005, the arrest warrant for the five leaders of the Lord Resistant’s Army charged for war crimes and crimes against humanity was released publicly in Uganda, whereas no action has been taken to date (Kaul,2007). This illustrates a major reliance on the ineffectiveness of the ICC in its duties. Second, almost since 2003 innocent lives have been at stake, primarily around 300,000 people have died in Darfur, Sudan and some other countries such as Colombia, Uganda, Democratic republic of Congo(DRC) due to violations, disputes, massacres, killings, etc and still the cold-blooded criminals are living freely (Phooko,2011). Further , as we discussed above about the Sudan’s case where was charged on for four allegations of murder, two instances of atrocities, and five cases of human rights violations and still out. What does this all tell us about ICC? I believe the ICC's lack of own police force is a major concern behind this that the perpetrators could not be nabbed because it is obvious why Omar-al-Bashir would pass state arrest warrants. Besides that, there are also proceedings that have been shut down either because of the accused's death, charges withdrawn, lack of evidence etc. While Libya has not yet ratified the ICC, on 26 February 2011, the Union National Security Council submitted the petition out of nowhere to the ICC, to which the ICC must exercise its authority under any conditions even if it is only some regional area of Libya (International Criminal Court,2002). According to the UNSC, Muammar Mohammed Abu Minyar Gaddafi was indicted for deliberately killing innocent civilians, breaching human rights, exploiting prosecutors and war crimes. Whereas on 22 November 2011, owing to his passing, the arrest warrant against him was revoked (International Criminal Court,2002). This clearly indicates the ICC's unsuccessful ability in not passing any authority for almost eight months and provide redress to the defendant’s families.

It is well known how essential the International Criminal Court is for African nations even after the experience of the two. One of the strongest supporters and the most important for the court was perhaps the African nations, provided that the cases brought before the court at its early phases of development were handed down by them (Fisher,2018). For the most part, 2016 and early 2017 represented the beginning of a transitional era in the relationship between the court and Africa, started in 2009 with regard to the arrest warrant for Omar-Al-Bashir and then this extraordinary move by the Gambia, South Africa and Burundi to encourage the ' ICC withdrawal approach ' (Fisher,2019). Indeed, during the Jamhuri Day celebrations in October, Ugandan President, Yoweri Museveni gave approval to the above withdrawal policy in a press and promised that he will make sure that the court exercises its authority on its own (Belle,2016). The cases ICC pursues in Africa makes people think that by being biased against them, the ICC continues to harass their countries leaders. Is it because of the number of cases ICC witnessed in Africa? Or just a matter of coincidence.

COURT’S CONFLICT WITH UNITED STATES

Ever since the court came into force, the US had claimed a very clear connection with the ICC. George W. Bush signed the Rome Statute early in 2000 but did not call for the legislature's enactment (Banerjee,2018). With the years in which Barack Obama took over the U.S. presidency, he observed this alliance with the court, diving into the issue and promoting it (Banerjee,2018). Although Clinton signed but never ratified the treaty. It is not legally enforceable then as a matter of fact. Clinton was resistant to the Senate's request for any kind of recommendations for its compliance, as the US perceived the court's operation in this respect (Banerjee,2018). In Sept. 2018, one of the U.S. National Security officials, Mr. John Bolton, went forward and pointed out that he is against the way ICC operates and expressed worries about how the tribunal handles its investigation in the case of any atrocities committed by America's military officers (Trump Administration Expresses Strong Disapproval of the International Criminal Court,2019). Then after few more actions, negotiations etc. As of September 2019, a statement is being made on behalf of the President of the United States announcing that the United States will use all available means to protect Americans along with those of their supporters from the arbitrary action of this unconstitutional trial (Trump Administration Expresses Strong Disapproval of the International Criminal Court,2019). According to the U.S., they are not willing to support ICC, do not want to provide any guidance or attend the tribunal. Because of all the accusations and lawsuits, the ICC no longer holds any role in front of them.

As a result of the relationship they have shared in the past, the United States denied the visa of members of the ICC this year in March who come forward to convict crimes in Afghanistan (Koehler,2019). As per America, the court does not hold any authority to investigate the American citizens under any law because the US is no longer a member of the ICC and hence has no obligations on the court. Americans, though, are entitled to any country's court where they commit a crime, so the authority of the ICC is no less constitutional than that (Koehler,2019). The US plays a critical role in keeping other influential nations from joining the ICC. But in fact, if we see, with all the war crimes and atrocities and massacres occurring in its territories, the state itself is not willing to stop such practises by not allowing the court to prosecute its citizens (Koehler,2019). Only when the domestic courts investigate this matter and use their judicial authority in a proper manner, I do not think the ICC would then have any concern and will, therefore, cease to engage itself. The United States opposes crimes against humanity and war crimes by taking legal action against the ICC. It enables offenders to feel their actions are reasonable and they will continue to do so, as their only threat may be tainted (Koehler,2019). Perhaps what nation must do is hold a meeting with ICC officials to discuss what they're thinking about and how they're going to proceed.

HOW DOES THE ICC WORKS?

In 1998, a convention called the Rome Statute created the International Criminal Court in which 120 countries joined and nations granted the ICC the power to pass jurisdiction over all war crimes and infringements apart from their domestic courts but only in effect after 1st July 2002. Some of the countries that signed the treaty are Africa, Latin America, Western European and Northern America, the Caribbean, Eastern Europe and the last but not the least Asia pacific (International Criminal Court,2002). ICC headquarters are in the Hague, Netherlands and sets up offices for inquiries (International Criminal Court,2002). The tribunal is not a replacement, or the existing courts are not abolished. It only strengthens them in a manner if the national courts are unable or unlikely to settle a dispute, and then the ICC comes to the rescue. ICC does not exclude anyone in the case of any crime or accusation, given their position in society. Under any conditions, the individual is criminally responsible as per the court. The ICC has a 4-organ framework where the first is the president who is the court's head (International Criminal Court,2002). Second, are the legislatures that ensure fairways, with 18 judges (International Criminal Court,2002). Then follows the prosecutor's office, which consists of three subdivisions of the one who is performing, prosecuting and dealing with cases among those charged with crimes (International Criminal Court,2002). The last is the Registry, the ones that support the jury (International Criminal Court,2002). There are certain crimes that fall within the authority of the ICC and then some serious prosecutions are held accountable to individuals. These are primarily genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and aggressive crime. The ICC operates in such a manner that at first the lawyers are given reports, analyses or evaluations, second an arrest warrant is released, third certain rights are granted to the defendant until the moment they are found guilty, then the proceedings against the accused are checked before the trial, then the trail takes place in The Hague, a closing statement or a verdict is then passed, if any party wants to appeal the prosecutor's ruling, the time will be granted and further changes will be made, and the last will be the participation of victims and the safety of witnesses (International Criminal Court,2002)

MAJOR CHALLENGES AND FAILURES FACED BY THE COURT

The ICC faced many serious difficulties. Which comes first is the barriers that it originally carried for the court. First, the ICC is accused of investigating just Africa because of its discrimination against them. Second the ICC has only been able to pass authority over the proceedings that will arise after 1 July 2002. Although doing a lot of work under the Rome Statute on the construction of the ICC, it was still a disappointment in many nations’ eyes. Teamwork is very important in order to make any company, organization or team an effective group, whereas the chief prosecutor's leadership style did not meet standards in the ICC and was unsuccessful, as a result, the funds originally invested were lost (Donovan,2012). The ICC relies on nations support to turn over the accused and help in gathering evidence to push up and conclude fair and effective proceedings (Donovan,2012). The lack of state involvement allows the perpetrators to move away easily, for example in the Omar-Al-Bashir case where evidence exists, the arrest warrant was issued but the government did not make an effort to put him behind bars or even challenge him about his acts. Indeed, the lack of assistance from these large powerful countries, such as China, Russia and the United States, presents a significant shortcoming in the ICC process.

For all the setbacks, the court also had some success in its growth processes. If the domestic courts are reluctant or unable to pass the jurisdiction by making a fair track, the ICC, not being a substitute to the national courts, is granted the title of last resort which in a sense, is a significant advantage to the states, as this would mitigate the offences and prosecute those who commit such abuses.

CONCLUSION

The weaknesses must be tackled to ensure the ICC's success and prosperity, and the achievements must be used as a strengthening aid. Several modifications must be undertaken within the next years to establish a position in the country (Donovan,2012). I would say, in my judgment, that although the International Criminal Court is still unsuccessful, it can make its influence greater if all the powerful countries are more involved. Second, if the court begins to build its own police force, they don't have to rely on the other countries to wait until their orders apprehend the suspects. Third, I believe it can assist in the credibility of the ICC to protect the world from war crimes and massacres by promoting more public awareness across countries. Forth, as a matter of fact, in the event of a happening, people see the court as a justice. The residents of the world claim that it is still in the custody of the tribunal to carry down the fair judgment, whether it is crimes against humanity, violations, murders, war crimes, etc. Indeed, if all states continue to comply with the functioning of the ICC and its operations and investigation system by not becoming an obstruction and presenting valid evidence, even if they may have to adapt and step forward, leaving the nations own democracy behind. The court may also have to make the horizon wide open by not only holding proceedings in Africa as the nation's citizens still suspect that the ICC is a biased body.

Bibliography

1. International Criminal Court. (2002, July 1). Retrieved from https://www.icc-cpi.int/Pages/cases.aspx
2. International Criminal Court. (2002, July 1). Retrieved from International Criminal Court: https://www.icc-cpi.int/Pages/cases.aspx
3. Kaul, H.-P. (2007). The International Criminal Court: Current Challenges and Perspectives. Washington University Global Studies Law Review, 6(3), 575-582. Retrieved 10 2, 2019, from https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1151&context=law_globalstudies
4. Koehler, M. (2019, April 5). United States Revokes Visa Access For ICC Members Seeking to Prosecute Afghanistan War Crimes. The Organization for World Peace. Retrieved from https://theowp.org/united-states-revokes-visa-access-for-icc-members-seeking-to-prosecute-afghanistan-war-crimes/
5. Phooko, M. R. (2011, January 5). How Effective the International Criminal Court Has Been: Evaluating the Work and Progress of the International Criminal Court. Notre Dame Journal of International & Comparative Law, 1(1). Retrieved from https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/ndjicl/vol1/iss1/6/
6. Sahai, A. (2015, May 9). The International Criminal Court: Effective or Not? The Organization for World Peace. Retrieved from https://theowp.org/the-international-criminal-court-effective-or-not/
7. Trump Administration Expresses Strong Disapproval of the International Criminal Court. (2019). American Journal of Ineternational Law, 113(1), 169-173. doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/ajil.2018.110
8. Banerjee, A. (2018, October 23). History of USA’s relationship with International Criminal Court. International Association For Political Science Students. Retrieved from https://www.iapss.org/2018/10/23/history-of-the-us-international-criminal-court-relations/
9. Belle, W. N. (2016, October 18). African Countries to Quit the International Criminal Court. The African Exponent. Retrieved from https://www.africanexponent.com/post/8063-african-countries-to-quit-the-international-criminal-court
10. Donovan, D. (2012, March 23). International Criminal Court: Successes and Failures. International Policy Digest. Retrieved from https://intpolicydigest.org/2012/03/23/international-criminal-court-successes-and-failures/
11. Fisher, K. J. (2018, December). Africa's role in the progression of international criminal justice: A moral and political argument. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 56(4), 541-568. doi:doi.org/10.1017/S0022278X18000587