Its Own Standards
by Lauren Ting
The International Criminal Court, officially opened in 2002, and designed to end impunity for international human rights violations and crimes against humanity, is currently investigating situations in Sudan, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Despite the efforts of the Court to create international standards for dealing with such heinous crimes, the US has voiced opposition towards the court since its inception, claiming that fear of prosecution could hinder military operations and threaten the safety of US citizens abroad.
Though progress in the Court has been slow, as details of procedure are worked out, slowly but surely, its evolution is visible. While the idea of an international criminal court has been around since the early 19th century, the first serious calls for a court came after World War I, then intensified with the formation of tribunals designed to hold Axis war criminals accountable for their actions during World War II.
With the Cold War, efforts slowed down, despite the International Law Commission (ILC) drafting a statute studying the jurisdiction of possible permanent international tribunals. In the late ‘80s, with war crimes on the rise, as drug trafficking proliferated in Trinidad and Tobago, and major conflicts grew in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, and Rwanda, the UN Security Council created separate tribunals for dealing with these atrocities, once again emphasizing the need for consistent international justice.
In 1994, the ILC finally presented its statute to the United Nations General Assembly, and a Preparatory Committee on the Establishment of the ICC was created, to allow NGO input, and secure a more finalized draft. This draft led to the United Nations Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of the ICC, held in Rome, Italy.
This conference took place in 1998, and concluded with 120 nations adopting the Rome Statute of the ICC, 7 nations (the US included) voting against, and 21 abstaining. From here, the Preparatory Commission was formed to finalize the details of the Court, and in 2002, with 60 official ratifications, the Treaty came into action and the primary group of the Court, the Assembly of States Parties, commenced meetings.
By the end of his presidency in 2000, Clinton had warmed to the principles of international justice behind the Court, and, despite reservations, signed on. When Bush came into office he essentially unsigned the Rome Statute and denounced the ICC, going so far as to encourage countries who had signed the Statute to then also sign Bilateral Immunity Agreements, rendering US citizens exempt from prosecution by the Court. Many of the countries that refused to sign these treaties were consequently punished via cutoffs to military aid.
A major obstacle in US endorsement of the court has been John Bolton’s presence as US Ambassador to the UN. In strong opposition to the ICC since his time as Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, Bolton has been actively targeting the Court and its goals for years, endorsing instead a more active militaristic approach to international peace.
Nonetheless, after several years of near-hostile treatment, the United States is finally tacitly warming to the International Criminal Court (ICC), in the interests of prosecuting the war criminals of Sudan. The ever-escalating situation in Darfur, Sudan, with government backed militia groups attacking unarmed villages, and ever-growing campaigns proclaiming the situation “genocide”, demands international action.
While the US suggested the creation of an ad-hoc international court, EU nations proclaimed Sudan the ideal test case for the ICC. Since Sudan is not an ICC member, in order to investigate, the UN Security Council had to refer the situation to the Court, leaving the US with a dilemma—support the Court, or leave the Sudanese people to fend for themselves. In the end the US simply abstained from voting, allowing the referral to go through.
Luis Moreno-Ocampo, an Argentine lawyer who has taught at many prestigious American universities, and the Chief Prosecutor of the ICC, recently presented parts of his investigation into the Sudanese situation before the UN Security Council. The US attended the briefing, and Bolton himself sent a representative, seen to outsiders as a tangible movement towards acceptance of the court and an atmosphere of cooperative diplomacy. Having grown to more than 100 member states, including many US allies, the Court can no longer be ignored completely, although the US still alleges that it will prevent any efforts towards prosecution of Americans.
Jess Bravin "Politics & Economics: U.S. Warms to Hague Tribunal; New Stance Reflects Desire to Use Court to Prosecute Darfur Crimes. " Wall Street Journal [New York, N.Y.] 14 Jun 2006, Eastern edition: A.4. National Newspapers (27). ProQuest.
