Saturday, January 29, 2011

Evaluating the International Criminal Court

By Lauren Maccarone '11

Many victims of war crimes, from all corners of the world, view the International Criminal Court (ICC) as their only hope of stopping perpetrators and obtaining justice. Most Americans, however, remain ignorant of the existence of the ICC, much less its role in and importance to international justice.
For the last eight months, I have served as a legal intern to the Coalition for the International Criminal Court (CICC). The CICC serves as the uniting force for over 2,000 non-governmental organizations worldwide that support the Court and its goals. During my time there, I researched and drafted memos on various ICC issues and met with legal advisors from CICC constituent member organizations, ICC member states, and the United Nations to discuss those issues. I truly loved every minute of my experience.

By far the most amazing part of the internship was the two weeks that I spent working with the CICC in Kampala, Uganda at the Inaugural ICC Review Conference.  Originally scheduled by States Parties (those nations who have signed the ICC’s underlying treaty, known as the Rome Statute) to discuss and pass the “Crime of Aggression,” it ultimately turned into so much more.

First, the conference was attended by far more than the now 111 States Parties. Specifically, ICC officials, prosecutors and staff from other criminal tribunals, high-level UN officials, representatives from non-state parties (such as the United States), academic experts from around the world, and most importantly, war crimes victims, also attended.

Second, the conference was extended an entire week so that those present could engage in a thorough evaluation (dubbed “stocktaking”) of the Court’s work thus far. As a result, the conference not only culminated in a Rome Statute amendment on the “crime of aggression,” but also in a working plan for how the ICC could develop and improve in the future.

The knowledge and experience that I gained from working with these individuals on revolutionary international criminal laws will prove invaluable for my career going forward. I was the most impressed by the overwhelming amount of dedication and enthusiasm shown for the Court. The poorest African nations were alongside the richest of Europe, negotiating into the early hours of the morning on what seemed like impossible compromises. Victims of the Lord’s Resistance Army, the conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo, and the Darfur genocide risked their lives and spent months of pay to travel to the Conference simply to reiterate the Court’s importance in their lives. I was shocked, and since I am an American, who can blame me?

Unfortunately, few Americans know what the ICC is, let alone support it. This is primarily due to the fact that the U.S. has not yet ratified the Rome Statute and thus, is not an ICC State Party. America’s reluctance to sign the Rome Statute stems from distrust in the Court’s use of universal jurisdiction, which allows any country to prosecute any perpetrator, regardless of his or her nationality, of crimes that are recognized as illegal by all nations under customary international law. For example, the ICC may prosecute any individual who commits the specific crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression.

This does not mean, however, the United States supports impunity for these crimes.  On the contrary, the U.S. delegation to Kampala was very vocal about its intention to cooperate with the Court in combating them.  But is this enough?

The Court, while fragile, is progressing onto the international scene at a rapidly increasing speed and at least 111 countries are already on board. As I observed, academics, UN officials, civil society, and most importantly, the victims of the world’s most heinous crimes all see the Court as a promising future solution.  At the very least, it is time for Americans to get more involved.  The rest of the world is moving ahead with its support for the Court, with or without us.

A version of this article appeared in print in the October 2010 issue of the Bridge.

No comments:

Post a Comment