International Criminal Court: Difference between revisions
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz (New page: The '''International Criminal Court (ICC)''' is an international organization created by the Rome Treaty, but not a part of the United Nations. It became operational when 120 natio...) |
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The '''International Criminal Court (ICC)''' is an international organization created by the [[Rome | {{subpages}} | ||
The '''International Criminal Court (ICC)''' is an international organization created by the [[Rome Statute]]<ref name=RS>{{citation | |||
| url = http://www.icc-cpi.int/Menus/ICC/Legal+Texts+and+Tools/Official+Journal/Rome+Statute.htm | |||
| title = Rome Statute | |||
| publisher = International Criminal Court}}</ref>, but not a part of the [[United Nations]] although it cooperates with the UN.<ref name=UN-ICC>{{citation | |||
| title = Agreement between the International Criminal Court and the United Nations | |||
| url =http://www.icc-cpi.int/Menus/ICC/Legal+Texts+and+Tools/Official+Journal/Negotiated+Relationship+Agreement+between+the+International+Criminal+Court+and+the+United+Nations.htm | |||
| publisher = International Criminal Court}}</ref> It became operational when 120 nations had signed that Treaty. | |||
As opposed to the [[International Court of Justice]], which hears disputes among countries, the ICC is focused on individuals accused of crimes against humanity, such as [[genocide]]. It is the successor to ''ad hoc'' judicial processes such as the [[International Military Tribunal (Nuremberg)]], the [[International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia]], the [[Nuremberg Military Tribunals]], the [[International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda]] and the [[International Military Tribunal (Tokyo)]]. | As opposed to the [[International Court of Justice]], which hears disputes among countries, the ICC is focused on individuals accused of crimes against humanity, such as [[genocide]]. It is the successor to ''ad hoc'' judicial processes such as the [[International Military Tribunal (Nuremberg)]], the [[International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia]], the [[Nuremberg Military Tribunals]], the [[International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda]] and the [[International Military Tribunal (Tokyo)]]. | ||
A number of major nations, including the [[United States of America]] and [[China]], have not signed the treaty or accept the ICC's jurisdiction. Reasons vary, ranging from a concern that it infringes on national sovereignty, to that it will be used in an unfair politicized manner under the rubric of "[[lawfare]]". Lawfare, as discussed by [[Jack Goldsmith]], is the use of [[international humanitarian law]] as a means of exerting the will of other nations on states with which they have ideological grievances. | A number of major nations, including the [[United States of America]] and [[China]], have not signed the treaty or accept the ICC's jurisdiction. Reasons vary, ranging from a concern that it infringes on national sovereignty,<ref name=Goldsmith-FLR-1997>{{citation | ||
| author = Goldsmith, Jack Landman & Curtis Bradley | |||
| title = The Current Illegitimacy of International Human Rights Litigation | |||
| volume = 66 | journal = Fordham Law Review | page = 319 | year = 1997 | |||
| url = http://eprints.law.duke.edu/archive/00001185/01/66_Fordham_L._Rev._319_(1997-1998).pdf | |||
}}</ref> to that it will be used in an unfair politicized manner under the rubric of "[[lawfare]]", essentially a new type of [[asymmetric warfare]].<ref name=CFR>{{citation | |||
| title = Lawfare, the Latest in Asymmetries | |||
| date = 18 March 2003 | |||
| publisher = [[Council on Foreign Relations]] | |||
| url = http://www.cfr.org/publication.html?id=5772 | |||
}}</ref> | |||
Lawfare, as discussed by [[Jack Goldsmith]], is the use of [[international humanitarian law]] as a means of exerting the will of other nations on states with which they have ideological grievances. Goldsmith specifically calls the Court "self-defeating".<ref name=ICC-Goldsmith>{{citation | |||
| title = The Self-Defeating International Criminal Court | |||
| author = Jack Goldsmith | |||
| url = http://www.uspolicy.be/Article.asp?ID={B1DF5062-A4E7-4D62-A76D-BEC01CF3211B} | |||
| journal = University of Chicago Law Review | year = 2003}}</ref> | |||
There is some sentiment, however, that a body like the ICC will be more just in applying [[universal jurisdiction]] than individual nations who have tried to extradite or prosecute individuals who neither performed the act in areas under their national jurisdictions, or against their citizens. This is a more extensive interpretation than actions taken against foreign defendants who are variously either resident in the country taking the action (e.g., [[Filartiga v. Pena-Irala]]) or by citizens of the national actor. | |||
It is located at [[The Hague]] in the [[Netherlands]], and funded primarily by its States Parties, as well as receives voluntary contributions from governments, international organizations, individuals, corporations and other entities. | It is located at [[The Hague]] in the [[Netherlands]], and funded primarily by its States Parties, as well as receives voluntary contributions from governments, international organizations, individuals, corporations and other entities. | ||
==References== | |||
{{reflist|2}} | |||
Revision as of 12:07, 4 September 2009
The International Criminal Court (ICC) is an international organization created by the Rome Statute[1], but not a part of the United Nations although it cooperates with the UN.[2] It became operational when 120 nations had signed that Treaty.
As opposed to the International Court of Justice, which hears disputes among countries, the ICC is focused on individuals accused of crimes against humanity, such as genocide. It is the successor to ad hoc judicial processes such as the International Military Tribunal (Nuremberg), the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, the Nuremberg Military Tribunals, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and the International Military Tribunal (Tokyo).
A number of major nations, including the United States of America and China, have not signed the treaty or accept the ICC's jurisdiction. Reasons vary, ranging from a concern that it infringes on national sovereignty,[3] to that it will be used in an unfair politicized manner under the rubric of "lawfare", essentially a new type of asymmetric warfare.[4]
Lawfare, as discussed by Jack Goldsmith, is the use of international humanitarian law as a means of exerting the will of other nations on states with which they have ideological grievances. Goldsmith specifically calls the Court "self-defeating".[5]
There is some sentiment, however, that a body like the ICC will be more just in applying universal jurisdiction than individual nations who have tried to extradite or prosecute individuals who neither performed the act in areas under their national jurisdictions, or against their citizens. This is a more extensive interpretation than actions taken against foreign defendants who are variously either resident in the country taking the action (e.g., Filartiga v. Pena-Irala) or by citizens of the national actor.
It is located at The Hague in the Netherlands, and funded primarily by its States Parties, as well as receives voluntary contributions from governments, international organizations, individuals, corporations and other entities.
References
- ↑ Rome Statute, International Criminal Court
- ↑ Agreement between the International Criminal Court and the United Nations, International Criminal Court
- ↑ Goldsmith, Jack Landman & Curtis Bradley (1997), "The Current Illegitimacy of International Human Rights Litigation", Fordham Law Review 66: 319
- ↑ Lawfare, the Latest in Asymmetries, Council on Foreign Relations, 18 March 2003
- ↑ Jack Goldsmith (2003), "The Self-Defeating International Criminal Court", University of Chicago Law Review