More than 10 years ago the International Criminal Court entered into force. It was designed to be a model of a global governing of human rights. Trying to set universal
standards for the jurisdiction of human rights, it is the first time in human history, that serious human rights violations such as genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression can be judged in a court of law. The thesis will argue, that the ICC therefore presents a milestone on the realization of international human rights. However, the ICC has to face many obstacles, most prominently the opposition by several UN member states, who refuse to accede the Court. The thesis will illuminate this development with the help of some cosmopolitan approaches.
The focus will be on the progress of universal human rights over the last centuries with the remarkable climax of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which also laid the roots for the later foundation of the ICC. In chapter 3 this thesis will broach the issue of the obstacles regarding the realization of human rights. As mentioned above, a major opposition still stems from the nation states, who are partly still stuck on a realist view of the international system. Out of fear, that they might lose
sovereignty, they prefer to follow their national interest instead of putting universal human rights into practice. To explicate this behavior of nation states, I have consulted the article „In the national interest“, published by Allen Buchanan in 2005. He reflects on the observation that human rights are in practice in most of all cases incompatible with the national interest of a nation state. Although the majority of all states will commit themselves on paper to the noble goal of human rights promotion, in reality their foreign policy will quite often display quite the opposite. As a reply, I will argue with the help of David Held, that a cosmoplitan answer to overcome these obstacles is possible by creating common institutions as a new layer of legal competence to which people can transfer public powers. To illustrate these considerations I will then discuss the International Criminal Court, as an example of such a cosmopolitan institution.
Table of Contents
1 Introduction
2 The Idea of Human Rights
2.1 Historical Evolution and Pioneers of the Concept „Human Rights“
2.2 Human Rights Today
3 Difficulties Regarding the Realization of Universal Human Rights
3.1 National Interests Opposing Human Rights
3.2 A Cosmopolitan Approach to Dissolve National Opposition
4 The International Criminal Court
4.1 History of the ICC
4.2 Structure and Principles
5 National Interest in Opposition to Participation in the ICC
5.1 Resentment in Africa
5.2 Resentment in Asia
5.3 Resentment in America
6 Conclusion
Research Objectives and Core Themes
The paper examines the effectiveness of the International Criminal Court (ICC) as a mechanism for upholding universal human rights, specifically investigating the tension between global humanitarian legal standards and the prevailing national interests of sovereign states. The central research inquiry focuses on why, despite the ICC's goal of preventing atrocities like genocide and war crimes, numerous states continue to resist participation due to concerns over sovereignty and potential bias.
- The theoretical evolution of human rights from historical origins to modern frameworks.
- The clash between cosmopolitan ideals of global justice and the "realist" approach of nation states.
- The structure, institutional principles, and historical development of the International Criminal Court.
- Regional perspectives on the ICC, focusing on opposition and resentment in Africa, Asia, and America.
- The impact of national sovereignty concerns and political self-interest on the enforcement of international criminal law.
Excerpt from the Book
3.1 National Interests Opposing Human Rights
The American professor of public policy and philosophy Allen Buchanan points out in his article „In the national interest“ that in spite of all these theoretically auspicious ideas, the idea of human rights is in practice in most of all cases incompatible with the national interest of a nation state. Although the majority of all states will commit themselves on paper to the noble goal of human rights promotion, in reality their foreign policy will quite often display quite the opposite.
Buchanan calls this phenomenon the Permissible Exclusivity Thesis. He summarizes it as the following: „It is always permissible for a state´s foreign policy to be determined exclusively by the national interest. If a state chooses, it may subordinate all other values to the pursuit of the national interest in any case.“ (Buchanan 2005: 111) In other words, in accordance with the Permissible Exclusivity Thesis it is permissible for nation states to violate basic human rights if those rights stand in the way of achieving national goals or realize their national interests. In one extreme fictitious example this could be e.g. that it would allow wars of aggression against harmless and weak countries if, for example, the national interest required expropriating their oil just for the pursuit of national wealth. According to the author the Permissible Exclusivity Thesis can be explained with the help of two justifications, first the Fiduciary Realist Justification and second the Instrumental Justification.
Summary of Chapters
1 Introduction: This chapter outlines the establishment of the ICC as a global governing body for human rights and introduces the central conflict regarding national state opposition.
2 The Idea of Human Rights: This section provides a historical overview of the development of human rights concepts and defines their current international status.
3 Difficulties Regarding the Realization of Universal Human Rights: This chapter analyzes the obstacles to human rights enforcement, specifically the "Permissible Exclusivity Thesis" and the proposed cosmopolitan solutions.
4 The International Criminal Court: This chapter details the historical creation and organizational structure of the ICC, including its primary organs and legal mandate.
5 National Interest in Opposition to Participation in the ICC: This chapter explores regional resistance to the ICC, identifying specific political motivations in Africa, Asia, and the United States.
6 Conclusion: This chapter synthesizes the findings, highlighting the persistent dilemma between international legal idealism and national political realism.
Keywords
International Criminal Court, Human Rights, National Interest, Cosmopolitanism, Rome Statute, Global Justice, Sovereignty, Realism, Foreign Policy, International Law, Peacekeeping, Humanitarian Law, Genocide, Crimes Against Humanity, Universalism
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this paper?
The paper explores the role of the International Criminal Court (ICC) as an institutional tool for enforcing universal human rights and analyzes why many nations resist it.
What are the primary themes discussed?
The main themes include the evolution of human rights, the conflict between state sovereignty and international legal jurisdiction, and the political motivations behind non-participation in the ICC.
What is the central research question?
The paper asks whether the ICC can effectively realize universal human rights when it faces persistent opposition from states that prioritize their national interests over international legal obligations.
What methodology does the author use?
The author employs a qualitative approach, analyzing existing literature, political theories like the "Permissible Exclusivity Thesis," and historical case studies regarding state reactions to the ICC.
What is covered in the main body of the work?
The main body examines the history of human rights, the structural setup of the ICC, and a detailed regional analysis of why countries in Africa, Asia, and the Americas have expressed resentment or opted out of the court.
Which keywords best characterize this research?
The work is characterized by terms such as International Criminal Court, National Interest, Cosmopolitanism, Rome Statute, and Sovereignty.
How does the "Permissible Exclusivity Thesis" explain state behavior?
The thesis argues that it is widely considered permissible for states to prioritize their national interests above all other concerns, including the protection of universal human rights, which often leads to conflict with international institutions.
Why does the United States maintain a hostile stance toward the ICC?
The paper highlights that the U.S. fears that the ICC could undermine national sovereignty and potentially lead to politically motivated prosecutions against its military personnel or officials.
What is the "cosmopolitan" perspective on global institutions?
The cosmopolitan approach argues for international institutions that transcend national borders to protect human rights, effectively creating a new layer of legal authority that holds global actors accountable regardless of their state of origin.
- Quote paper
- Ronja Maus (Author), 2015, The International Criminal Court as a Means to Realize Universal Human Rights, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/354820
