Thesis on "International Court"

Thesis 6 pages (2465 words) Sources: 12 Style: Harvard

[EXCERPT] . . . .

United States Accept/Reject International Criminal Court

Abstract the International Criminal Court has been empowered with the authority to prosecute crimes against humanity, war crimes, aggression, and genocide. The creation of the court as an international body instilled with powers to prosecute these crimes followed the extensively documented acts of genocide in the former nation-state of Yugoslavia, and Rwanda. While the Clinton Administration took the initial steps in 1998 by signing on to endorse what is the authorizing power of the court, the Rome Statute, President George W. Bush repudiated Clinton's signature on the basis that participation in an international court would circumvent U.S. courts, and would cause U.S. citizens to lose the rights afforded them under the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution. While the premise upon which the court was created is a noble one, there are problems that the United States Congress must be made aware before signing an American commitment to the court. At this point there is a strong humanitarian interest in preventing crimes against humanity, and especially genocide; it remains unclear as to what would be the American public's response to surrendering the rights of its military personnel, or a president who takes the country into war following an act of aggression and terrorism as happened on September 11, 2001. Abu Ghraib stunned Americans, who saw their military sons and daughters more as peace makers and peace keepers than as brutal prison guards and torturers of human beings, regardless of their alleged offenses in a war zone. The mood of Americans, however, would not have lent itself to prosecuting the military personnel involved at Abu Ghraib

Continue scrolling to

download full paper ⤓

in an international court. While Americans supported justice, they supported American military justice, and would not have responded favorably to surrendering that justice to an international court. Had that happened, and had America turned the Abu Ghraib military violators over to the ICC, it would have been the ICC's legitimizing case and would have served to establish the ICC as the unquestionable authority for the four elements it is empowered to prosecute.

Introduction

The idea of a world community is premised on the basis of a shared concept of humanity. That is, that all human beings have a right to life, and to achieve a quality of life reflective of mankind's advances in science, medical science, socioeconomic health, and justice. Justice is a key element in preventing chaos, and as the world community emerges, it must emerge with a judicial body responsible for meting out justice on a world scale.

Since 1996, when the idea of the court was proposed to member countries of the United Nations, many countries, including Britain, Italy, Canada and France have supported the initiative of an international criminal court, while the United States has rejected the role of an international criminal court in the lives of American citizens. Today, the United States is reconsidering its initial rejection of participation in an international criminal court. It is the goal of this paper to present for consideration both sides of the argument revolving around the idea of U.S. participation in an international criminal court from an American perspective.

This paper discusses the implications of the laws under which American citizens would be subjected to in an international criminal court. This paper will examine whether or not, too, subjecting Americans to the court of laws as represented by the notion of an international criminal court would be an infringement of the rights guaranteed Americans under the United States Constitution. Also, if the government, by agreeing to a U.S. participation in such a court, would stand in violation of the Constitution under which it operates as a government.

International Criminal Court

The International Criminal Court (ICC) was created to address those issues at a level of international interaction amongst the nations of the world that translate into crimes against humanity, genocide, war crimes, and aggression (McNerney, Patricia, 2001, p. 181). The establishment of the ICC was not a new concept when it was established in 1996 (Aksar, Yusuf and Cass, F., 2004, xix). Prior to its establishment, the Nuremberg Military Tribunal had been convened and held to try World War II military and governmental leaders in crimes against humanity committed in the pre and World War II Germany, and other European nations that Germany invaded with, in part, the goal of eradicating the Jewish people from the planet. It was a goal that the German leadership under Adolf Hitler did not accomplish, but towards that goal murdered what has been widely affirmed as five million Jews. As many as two million more individuals were murdered for defects like mental retardation, and other afflictions related not related to the Jewish culture. The Nuremberg Trials successfully prosecuted German military and government officials who acted on the orders of Adolf Hitler in carrying out the mass murders.

Following acts of genocide in the former state of Yugoslavia, now Bosnia-Herzogovina, and the extensively reported genocide in Rwanda, International Court Tribunal Yugosolavia (ICTY) and International Court Tribunal Rwanda (ICTR) were established and conducted to determine the crimes against humanity following those atrocities (Aksar and Cass, p. 8).

Then, in 1996 (finalized in 1998), the International Criminal Court (ICC) was created in Rome, when members of the international community met, or their non-governmental organizational representatives. The "Rome Statute" from which the court is authorized to try and prosecute individuals for the four elements of crimes, was signed off on by the Clinton Administration, but Clinton's signature was repudiated by the Bush Administration (Aksar and Cass, p. 2).

As a result of this work, a Diplomatic Conference, the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, was held in Rome, Italy, from 15 June to 17 July 1998 and terminated with the adoption of a 'Statute of the International Criminal Court (Aksar and Cass, p. 49)."

Sixty countries ratified the Rome Statute (Marston, Allison, 2003, p. 1633). To date, the ICC continues to work out many of the problems that have posed problems for the nations that have not signed on to the Statute, including the United States.

Problems with ICC that United States Might Consider

The Rome Statute of the ICC excises away from the independent nation-states their sovereign right in conducting the business of trying and prosecuting, or not prosecuting, their own citizens. A nation's rights over their citizens, soldiers, and, in the case of war, even the U.S. president, would be circumvented by the authority vested in ICC (McNerney, p. 181). For this reason, the Rome Statue of the ICC poses a concern to U.S. citizens and law makers (McNerney, p. 181).

Patricia McNerney in a 2001, Law and Contemporary Problems journal article, points out that the first problem with the Rome Statue of the ICC, is that it reflects non-governmental organizations (NGOs) representing the interests of sovereign nations (p. 181). This is a problem, because without official nation-state representation, because there little comfort in the need to be convinced or to feel good about the elements of an international treaty when interests are represented by NGOs. This is, as McNerney says, a problem that must be considered by the United States Congress before agreeing to endorse the ICC.

The four crimes that the ICC will deal with: crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and aggression, are not defined (McNerney, p. 181). Immediately there emerges a problem, because, at this point in time, the President of the United States could, if the United States were signed on to the ICC Rome Statute, be prosecuted in the ICC for the actions stemming from Afghanistan and Iraq - probably more so Iraq. To sign on to the ICC in a way that allows American legislators or the president to become subordinate to the ICC, is to surrender the American sovereignty.

Another problem is that it transfers control over American soldiers to the ICC. What America recently experienced with its soldiers in Iraq, at Abu Ghraib, would, under the ICC, mean that American soldiers could be prosecuted and tried in the ICC, and that the American military would lose total control over the interpretation of evidence, the military court martial process, and the sentencing, and, as warranted, penalties such as carrying out the death penalty.

As pointed out by McNerney, is that the Rome Statute draws from other treaties, and it is at this point ambiguous as to the delineation of limits within which the ICC could prosecute and convict individuals on the four elements (p. 181). Allison Marston Danner (2003) points out that the ICC prosecutor is very much reminiscent of the role that Americans would recognize as having been performed by "special prosecutors," like Ken Star, whose investigation of the Clinton's alleged financial issues cost the American taxpayers $60 million dollars (Marston, p. 1633). It remains unclear as to how the cost of the ICC's investigatory, trial, and prosecution costs would be met (Marston, p. 1633).

In summary, the main problems with… READ MORE

Download Full Paper

Write a New Paper for Me

Quoted Instructions for "International Court" Assignment:

“

Topic: The USA government is reconsidering its current opposition to the 1998 Statute of the International Criminal Court. As an independent adviser to the US State Department, an***** the strengths and weaknesses of a proposal that the USA should join its allies, such as Britain, Italy, Canada and France, to support the ICC.

Purpose

A common duty of a policy professional is to brief decision makers about a particular issue, situation, or scenario. The purpose of a briefing is to provide a clear and concise

exposition of the situation or issues, any policy dimensions and implications, and recommendations for action. For example, as an international human rights adviser, consultant or advocate, you may be called upon to provide a brief examining a particular issue, in the context of the development of human rights. Such a paper would provide

advice towards policy on this issue as part of a broader human rights agenda or global justice regime.

Structure and content

A briefing paper should include:

1. A clear statement of the topic of the brief and short summary of the issue (1 page): A

concise statement of the topic to be considered, clearly outlining the purpose (and

relevance) of the paper to the reader = problem definition.

2. A relevant and brief background to the issue(s) (1 page): A concise summary of

details necessary for the reader to understand how and why the topic is important

(what led to this problem/issue, how it evolved, previous actions or decisions).

3. A concise analysis of the issues, policy implications, and policy options (34

pages):

The aim is to present details necessary for the reader to make an informed decision.

Drawing on questions formulated earlier to focus the topic, identify individual issues

for analysis of current situation (who is involved, current status, approach)Í¾ key

considerations (important facts, considerations, developments)Í¾ implications

(relationship to sources of law/governance, distributional or political effects*****“who will gain and who will lose)Í¾ possible options (concise observations on advantages and

disadvantages of each).

4. Conclusions and recommendations for action (34

pages): Summarise the main

points that you want to make, clearly establishing a link to relevant parts of the main

body of the document. Recommendations should clearly direct the reader best

through to worst option, substantiating why, with reference to facts and implications

already advanced.

5. Annexes or appendices: Supplementary information the reader might find useful, but

which is not necessarily crucial to understanding the issue.

Format

Word limit: 2,000 words (excluding ancillary information, table of contents, annexes, list

of references or bibliography).

Sources: Minimum of 12 for AIR234 and 20 for AIR334 drawn from relevant law, theory,

empirical evidence and secondary commentary.

Formatting: No boxes or bullet/dot points. You may use illustrations, charts and maps if

relevant.

Before you submit

Ask yourself:

1. Is the purpose of the briefing note clear (did you formulate questions when drafting to

identify issues for consideration and to develop an overarching theme)?

2. Does it contain information that isn*****t essential to the purpose?

3. Is everything that needs to be in it there?

4. Is it easy to read and do sections lead logically from one to the other?

5. Have you substantiated statements?

Marking criteria:

Â· Objectives: Described the problem and the scope of the paper in a wellstructured

Introduction.

Â· Law and politics: Reviewed the international and regional human rights treaties and

principles, and/or the policies and laws raised by the problem.

Â· Background: Clearly outlined the political, social and economic background of the

problem, appropriately using a range of sourcesÍ¾

Â· Problemsolving:

Proposed a solution or plan of action and discussed the

implications of your proposed solution.

Â· Recommendations: Included a summaryÍ¾ a wellrounded

conclusion and set of

recommendations.

Â· References: Accurate referencing and list of all sources.

Â· Expression: Correct spelling, grammar, and a competent use of academic English.

How to Reference "International Court" Thesis in a Bibliography

“International Court.” A1-TermPaper.com, 2008, https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/united-states-accept-reject-international/591619. Accessed 3 Jul 2024.

International Court (2008). Retrieved from https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/united-states-accept-reject-international/591619

A1-TermPaper.com. (2008). International Court. [online] Available at: https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/united-states-accept-reject-international/591619 [Accessed 3 Jul, 2024].

”International Court” 2008. A1-TermPaper.com. https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/united-states-accept-reject-international/591619.

”International Court” A1-TermPaper.com, Last modified 2024. https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/united-states-accept-reject-international/591619.

[1] ”International Court”, A1-TermPaper.com, 2008. [Online]. Available: https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/united-states-accept-reject-international/591619. [Accessed: 3-Jul-2024].

1. International Court [Internet]. A1-TermPaper.com. 2008 [cited 3 July 2024]. Available from: https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/united-states-accept-reject-international/591619

1. International Court. A1-TermPaper.com. https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/united-states-accept-reject-international/591619. Published 2008. Accessed July 3, 2024.

Related Thesis Papers: