It is the argument of this dissertation that the International Criminal Court is an appropriate tool for the enforcement of international criminal law and embodies a shifting notion of state sovereignty. Historically, both multilateral and unilateral attempts to enforce international criminal law have been progressive but not wholly successful. The International Criminal Court is rooted in customary law and addresses the failures of past attempts. The Court’s opposition has illustrated problems of state sovereignty, which in turn exemplifies how the International Criminal Court embodies a shifting notion of state sovereignty. The sources used are the existing academic literature, interviews, international statute, magazines, and newspaper articles.
Contents
I. HYPOTHESIS
II. INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER 1: THE PRELUDE TO THE ICC
1.1 Legal Principles
CHAPTER 2: FRUITLESS EFFORTS TO ENFORCE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW UNIVERSALLY
2.1 Post-War Tribunals
2.1.1 Victor’s Justice
2.1.2 A continuation of Victor’s Justice
2.2 Pinochet: a unilateral approach
2.3 The ‘Pinochet Effect’
CHAPTER 3: THE PRINCIPLES OF THE ICC AND U.S. OPPOSITION
3.1 Complementarity
3.2 International Core Crimes
3.3 Customary law
3.4 A closer look at the law
3.5 Conditioned Sovereignty
CHAPTER 4: THE IMPACT ON SOVEREIGNTY
CONCLUSION
Objectives and Topics
This dissertation examines whether the International Criminal Court (ICC) functions as an appropriate forum for enforcing international criminal law and explores how the institution embodies a shifting notion of state sovereignty, analyzed through a normative and empirical framework.
- History and development of international criminal law
- Evaluation of ad hoc tribunals and unilateral approaches (Pinochet case)
- Principles of the ICC, including complementarity and international core crimes
- Analysis of U.S. opposition and its relationship to sovereignty
- Theoretical concepts of 'Kantian world society' and 'conditioned sovereignty'
Excerpt from the Book
The ‘Pinochet Effect’
Pinochet’s reign of terror was archetypal of a general brought to power by a military coup. In the name of stability, “… more than 3,000 political opponents were victims of assassinations or “forced disappearances”.” His detention was not only a turning point in itself but part of a much wider recognition of individuals as entities under international law, turning the “unthinkable into the actual”.
Pinochet’s detention was to bring back the old maxim that had been given new life through the ad hoc trials of the ICTY and ICTR, but had not emerged as completely legitimate; that crimes are committed by men, not abstract states.
The ‘Pinochet effect’ inspired myriad investigations against former and sitting dictators and notorious human rights abusers. Mengistu Haile Mariam, a former Ethiopian dictator, was investigated for crimes against humanity in December 1999 at the request of the South African minister for justice and lawyers while he was in South Africa for medical treatment. Mengistu left South Africa before the investigation could occur.
Although this case and others were not completed in the sense that no dictator was charged, they do present a powerful deterrent for human rights abuses around the world, whether committed by, inter alia, dictators, warlords, or religious fanatics.
Summary of Chapters
I. HYPOTHESIS: Defines the core argument that the ICC is an appropriate tool for enforcement and reflects a transformation in state sovereignty.
II. INTRODUCTION: Outlines the scope of the dissertation, focusing on the debate surrounding the ICC rather than specific case studies, and introduces the historical context.
CHAPTER 1: THE PRELUDE TO THE ICC: Reviews the historical development of international law from ancient customs to 20th-century developments in humanitarian law.
CHAPTER 2: FRUITLESS EFFORTS TO ENFORCE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW UNIVERSALLY: Assesses the limitations of ad hoc tribunals like Nuremberg, ICTY, and ICTR, and the impact of the Pinochet case.
CHAPTER 3: THE PRINCIPLES OF THE ICC AND U.S. OPPOSITION: Analyzes the fundamental legal principles of the ICC and scrutinizes the criticisms raised by U.S. officials such as David J. Scheffer.
CHAPTER 4: THE IMPACT ON SOVEREIGNTY: Examines how the ICC challenges traditional notions of sovereignty, transitioning toward a 'Kantian' conception where states are held accountable by global norms.
CONCLUSION: Synthesizes the findings, confirming the ICC's importance as a superior alternative to unilateral/multilateral approaches and its role in redefining sovereignty.
Keywords
International Criminal Court, ICC, State Sovereignty, International Criminal Law, Human Rights, Complementarity, Customary Law, Pinochet, Kantian World Society, Ad Hoc Tribunals, Universal Jurisdiction, Accountability, Rome Statute, Foreign Policy, International Justice.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core argument of this dissertation?
The work argues that the International Criminal Court is an effective and necessary tool for enforcing international criminal law and serves as a primary example of how the traditional concept of state sovereignty is shifting.
What are the central themes of the research?
The key themes include the evolution of international legal mechanisms, the tension between state interests and universal human rights, and the transformation of sovereign authority.
What is the primary objective of the study?
The objective is to determine if the ICC is a viable institution for enforcing international criminal law and to analyze its broader impact on the theory and practice of sovereignty.
What research methodology does the author apply?
The dissertation utilizes an empirical approach supported by normative theory, analyzing secondary literature, journal articles, and interviews with authorities to build its argument.
What topics are covered in the main body?
The chapters cover the historical prelude to the ICC, a critique of past ad hoc tribunals, an analysis of the ICC's core legal principles, and the theoretical implications of the Court on state sovereignty.
Which keywords characterize the work?
Major keywords include International Criminal Court, State Sovereignty, Complementarity, Kantian World Society, and Universal Jurisdiction.
How does the author characterize the 'Pinochet Effect'?
The author describes it as a milestone that helped shift the status of individuals under international law from mere 'objects' to 'legal entities' capable of being held accountable.
How does the dissertation interpret U.S. opposition to the ICC?
The author suggests that U.S. opposition is partly symbolic, rooted in a defensive nationalist perspective that prioritizes absolute control over state actors despite the country's own commitment to democratic values.
What is the significance of the 'Kantian conception of world society'?
It provides a framework for understanding that the ICC does not aim to abolish states, but rather to complement international law by conditioning sovereignty on the protection of universal human rights.
- Quote paper
- Oliver Holmes (Author), 2008, The International Criminal Court and problems of state sovereignty, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/139744
