 |
| The ICC |
For centuries, jurists defined international law solely in terms of relations between states. World leaders acted with impunity because international law did not hold them accountable. But this has been changing. The UN tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia address the legal responsibilities of individuals who have committed crimes of war and crimes against humanity. National courts, too, have exercised jurisdiction over world leaders, and some, such as former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet, have been charged by courts in many countries. The International Criminal Court will take this process further still. This page tracks these and other developments that bring hope of a more just international order. GPF follows development around international law and the discussion around it very closely. Coverage of the International Criminal Court, the International Court of Justice and the UN backed regional courts are central in this coverage.
 |
|
The ICJ, picture credit:
People Daily
|
The International Court of Justice is the UN system's highest judicial body. The ICJ arbitrates between states, who must agree to abide by the Court's decision before their case will be heard. Here, particular emphasis is given to the relationship between the ICJ and the Security Council. Many have suggested that the ICJ should have the power of judicial review over the Security Council's actions to ensure that they are consistent with the UN Charter and other instruments of international law. Analysis of the ICJ can be found here.
The United Nations established special international criminal tribunals in Rwanda and Yugoslavia to prosecute those responsible for atrocities during times of war and genocide. Successful convictions of these political and military leaders are meant to bring justice to victims and to deter others from committing such crimes in the future. These special tribunals gave impetus to the formation of the International Criminal Court (ICC), finally established in 2003. Unlike the ICC, the special tribunals have limited jurisdictions and do not threaten the possible prosecution of leaders or nationals of powerful countries like the United States. These sections follows important cases in the Yugoslavia and Rwanda tribunals, as well as developments at the Special Courts in Sierra Leone, Lebanon, Cambodia and East Timor. In addition, the page covers discussions about the trials of Saddam Hussein and other top Baath Party officials, as well as the implications for international justice and criminal law.
 |
|
Picture credit:
European Union
|
The ad hoc tribunals continue to prosecute and sentence individuals who have committed especially serious violations of international criminal law. Special tribunals and national courts now occasionally exercise such jurisdiction as well, and the International Criminal Court has also begun to investigate and hear war crimes. For the most Notorious cases GPF has created a "Rogues Gallery." In these pages GPF provides information on a sample of well-known individuals who are accused of major crimes, yet continue to elude prosecution. Some of these suspects have already been indicted by tribunals but others have not. We include examples from five continents. Special pages exist for; Viktor Bout, Radovan Karadzic, Bob Kerrey, Henry Kissinger, Joseph Kony, Ratko Mladic, Donald Rumsfeld, Charles Taylor, General Wiranto, Augusto Pinochet, Foday Sankoh, and Ariel Sharon.
The US has a special relationship with International law as it often opposes the implementation of International law against US citizens. The Alien Tort Claims Act US citizen "impunity" is solified in. Since the 1980s, plaintiffs have used this 1789 US law to bring civil suits in US courts against individuals who have violated "the law of nations." Recently, human rights activists have used the ATCA to sue transnational corporations for violations of international law outside the US. If these suits are not blocked by the Bush Administration, then ATCA could become a powerful tool of corporate accountability.
GPF has a special interest and wide coverage of the US, UN and International Law. The George W. Bush administration has embarked on a strategy of hard line unilateralism, disregarding the UN and international law. Ever since the beginning of the Bush administration and the US' failure to ratify the Rome treaty, recognizing the ICC, the relation between the US and International Law have been troubled.
A theoretical analysis is covered in our Universal Justice section, here. Other general articles can be found here.
