International Criminal Court

1. International Criminal Court Presentation by: Brigette Henk

2. The ICC: How it Came About: • As early as the late 19th century, there were discussions about the need for a permanent international tribunal • These arguments grew louder after WWI, in the case of the German Kaiser • Nothing happened because nobody could agree on the type of jurisidiction • WWII precursors included the Four Power Agreement and the Nuremburg Trial • Post-war, early 50’s, there was still not enough support for permanence • Early 90s Rwandan/Yugoslavian Tribunal trials paved way for the ICC

3. The ICC: It’s purpose • The ICC is a “court of last resort” • To prosecute severe violations of international law • Crimes against humanity, war crimes, genocide • Makes up for the deliberate/unintentional failure of national law • Takes cases in which national courts are “unable or unwilling” to dutifully process a case • Deals with cases arising after July 1, 2002 • It’s power is NOT retro-active

4. It’s jurisdiction is valid when… • There is Genocide, War Crimes, Crimes against Humanity • The accused is a member of a state party • The crime took place in the territory of the accused • The national courts are unwilling/able to try the crime • Referred by the United Nations Security Council

5. The Structure of the ICC • Based in the Hague, Netherlands • Cases can be tried anywhere • Four Organs of the Court • Presidency (three judges, elected amongst the 18) • Current trio: Korea, Mali and Germany • Judicial divisions (18 judges from around the world) • Pre-trial, Trial, Appeals • Office of the Prosecutor • Takes referrals, conducts research and leads the prosecution • Registry • The administrative services sector

6. The EU and the ICC • During initial proposals the EU was not united • Great Britain/France were not immediately supported • Germany, Spain, Netherlands, others expressed early support • The Rome Statute acted as a compromise between MS • Individual policy positions influenced some EU MS to change • When the ICC was signed the EU became unified • However, the process of agreement does not reflect CFSP • Its subsequent support is an example of CFSP • They have become “active” in the promotion of the ICC, as the EU • ICC reflects major importance of major EU tenets • Rule of law, human rights, basic liberties

7. The ICC: Source of Conflict • Many countries feared a loss of sovereignty • African countries feared that the ICC was an excuse to jail their leaders • Fear loss of immunity of their leaders • Fear of politically motivated prosecutions

8. Ratifiers of the Rome Statute 108 Countries have signed AND ratified Rome Statute

9. Signatories of the Rome Statute • 40 Countries have signed but NOT ratified • In Europe: Armenia, Czech Republic, Moldova, Monaco, Russia and Ukraine • In Africa: Algeria, Angola, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Côte d'Ivoire, Egypt, Eritrea, Guinea-Bissau, Morocco, Mozambique, São Tomé and Príncipe, Seychelles, Sudan and Zimbabwe. • In the Americas: Bahamas, Chile, Haiti, Jamaica, Saint Lucia and the United States. • In Asia: Bahrain, Bangladesh, Iran, Israel, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Oman, Philippines, Solomon Islands, Syria, Thailand, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan and Yemen. • (list supplied from Wikipedia) • These forty countries are legally prevented from getting in the way of the treaty • States that did not sign by Dec 31, 2000 must “accede to the treaty” • Eight have thus far, others are in the process

10. Those who refuse to sign or ratify • Iraq (reversed a decision to sign, citing pressure from the US) • Lebanon (citing “intense pressure” from the US) • Turkey (reversed a decision, despite pressure from EU) • China (believes it interferes with sovereignty and national law) • Israel (signed but refuses to ratify, clearly accomplice of US) • India ( worries about its internal conflicts, and interference with national court system) • Pakistan (worries about lack of immunity for heads of state)

11. EU vs US • The US led the establishment of the ICTY and ICTR • Evidently prefers use of IC on a case-by-case basis • US was very worried about the ICC’s ability to try Americans • They were not willing to let their citizens/leaders be tried • They prohibited their military/other groups from helping ICC • December 31, 2000 Bill Clinton signed the treaty • In 2002 the US “unsigned” the ICC treaty, firmly indicating its opposition

12. Current investigations and open cases • Northern Uganda (Crimes against Humanity, War Crimes) • In pre-trial motion, four arrest warrants are valid • The Democratic Republic of Congo (three open cases) • Thomas Lubanga, rebel leader, arrested locally and transferred to ICC custody • He was arrested for War Crimes (child soldiers), in 2006 • His trial, the first by the ICC, began in January 2009 • The Central African Republic • One case in Pre-Trial (Crimes against Humanity, War Crimes) • Darfur (Crimes against Humanity, War Crimes) • (Sudan has signed the Rome treaty, but not ratified it) • Three open cases, all in Pre-trial motion • Referral by UNSC

13. References • Deliberating CFSP: European Foreign Policy and the International Criminal Court (Nicole Deitelhoff) • http://www.icc-cpi.int • http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c4/ICCmemberstatesworldmap102007.png • interkulti.eu/Junglelaw/images/stories/17.jpg