The Rome Statute, signed by 120 countries in 1998, became the foundation for the creation of the ICC. Its main purpose is to ensure accountability for the crimes of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and aggression. The Statute defined the Court’s jurisdiction The Rome Statute: and introduced the principles of complementarity between national judicial systems.
But from the moment of ratification, it became clear that many difficulties lie ahead. First, not all countries have joined this treaty. The USA, Russia, China, India and other major powers have not ratified the Statute, which seriously undermines the legitimacy and effectiveness of the Court. As a lawyer, I cannot help but draw attention to this fact: how can global justice be guaranteed if key players on the world stage stand aside?
Impunity or selectivity?
One of the key challenges facing the ICC is 99 acres data accusations of selectivity. Since its inception in 2002, the Court has focused largely on crimes committed in Africa. This has led to accusations of neo-colonialism. The African Union has even threatened a mass withdrawal of member states from the The Rome Statute: Rome Statute.
Why is this happening?
Some argue that the ICC is simply carrying out its duties where national google ads agencies in washington dc justice systems are failing. Others point to political motives: major powers that have not ratified the Statute use their influence to steer the Court in their favor. Take Sudan, for example. The arrest warrant for Omar al-Bashir for genocide is undoubtedly a historic step. But at the same time, the Court does not intervene in similar crimes in other parts of clean email the world.
As a lawyer, I am used to working with complex, often ambiguous cases. And experience tells me that recognizing the jurisdiction of the ICC for Ukraine is a tool that can fundamentally change the rules of the game.