Home Random Page


CATEGORIES:

BiologyChemistryConstructionCultureEcologyEconomyElectronicsFinanceGeographyHistoryInformaticsLawMathematicsMechanicsMedicineOtherPedagogyPhilosophyPhysicsPolicyPsychologySociologySportTourism






The International Criminal Court

A Theory of International Justice

 

According to Trials and Errors: Principles of Pragmatism in Strategies of International Justice, “justice does not lead;it follows” (Snyder & Vinjamuri, 2011). This theory posits that the requirement of rule or social contract, and powers vested therein, should be vested within a political system. The political system becomes exponential to the process leading to the requirement of a just nation-state (Snyder et al., 2011). The Global Future states that “all autonomous, independent political entities engaged in sustained interaction have developed rules that define appropriate behavior for certain situations. All the rules of modern international law may not be backed by a formal, unified system of sanctions, both state and nonstate actors rely on them to coordinate their behavior and redress their grievances” (Kegley & Raymond, 250, 2012). Cultural relativism stipulates to the normative standards across various ethnocentric groups and differences between nation-states sometime results in both internal conflict within a nation-state and external destructive conflict between nation-states. Issues such as human rights, civil liberties violations, terrorism, genocide, and threat of mass destruction from biological, chemical, or nuclear weapons are differences that are imperative while overcoming differences between nation-states.

The International Court of Justice

 

Legal disputes of international scope are decided or settled by the International Court of Justice. The mission of this court is to provide global security by alleviating conflict. This court consists of fifteen judges and is located at the Peace Palace in The Hague, Netherlands. Negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, and judicial settlement are all matters the court settles, advises, or offers opinion in. Cases could include maritime, environmental, sovereignty, territorial boundaries, or issues related to international issues related to peace and security (ICJ, 2011). Most matters settled within the international court of justice are selective to both private and public international law, however, normally specific too public international law. “Complaints generally emphasize instances where bystanders over-looked the transgressions of aggressive states engaged in illegal activity” (Kegley et al., 250, 2012). One problem that sometimes strongly affects nation-states in relation to the multilateral position taken by the international court of justice is the radical religious and extreme political differences which determine outcomes for each particular culture. Because the International Court of Justice is unable to determine matters political in nature, they sometimes have difficulties intervening within internal matters involving sovereign nations.

The International Criminal Court

According to Credible commitments and The International Criminal Court, while sitting along side the Hague Court, The International Criminal Court was designed upon the Rome Statue in 1999. This court, unlike the Hague court mandated through the United Nations, has as a purpose of the “ratification of the ICC is associated with tentative steps toward violence reduction and peace in those countries precisely least likely to be able to commit credibly to



foresworn atrocities” (Simmons & Danner, 225, 2010). Is Peace in the Interest of Justice states that “the the establishment of the ICC is the most ambitious step the international community has taken in introducing criminal accountability into the culture of international relations. . . . It can exercise universal jurisdiction if the Security Council refers a case. Otherwise, ICC jurisdiction requires some nexus to state consent . . . The ICC can only step in when national systems of justice are unwilling or unable to investigate or prosecute (Mingst et al., [Rodman, 275] 2011). “The Rome statute of the ICC also identifies the crime of aggression, but the signatories disagree on how it should be defined and what specific role the Court should play in dealing with aggression so as to not infringe on the prerogatives of the UN Security Council” (Kegley & Raymond, 262, 2010). “The ICC does not recognize any of the immunities traditionally accorded to heads of state and other senior officials under international law. In fact the treaty overrides any immunity that states may grant to presidential, parliamentary, or legislative officials in their domestic systems (Simmons et al., 230, 2010)

 


Date: 2015-12-18; view: 795


<== previous page | next page ==>
Methods for team building. | Weapons of Mass Destruction and Terrorism
doclecture.net - lectures - 2014-2024 year. Copyright infringement or personal data (0.006 sec.)