Purpose and Function of the International Criminal Court (ICC)
The International Criminal Court (ICC) is a court of last resort for international crimes. In this context, court of last resort means that the ICC only gets involved when no other credible judicial body is capable of willing to handle the case. Cases end up in the ICC when the nations involved seek the assistance of the court (Mendes, 2019). Further, the ICC only handles a clearly defined retinue of international crimes, which include genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and crimes of aggression. These events count as international crimes even when they happen within a specific nation. The ICC has three main arms, the office of the president, the office if the prosecutor, and the court registrar (Mendes, 2019). Its mandate includes investigating international crimes through the office of the prosecutor. When necessary, the court then proceeds to conduct criminal trials under the office of the president. Upon conviction and sentencing, constituent members provide amenities for incarceration.
Why the United States has not Joined the ICC
The USA has had a varied relationship with the ICC, depending on the government in power. For example, President Clinton, a Democrat, signed the Rome Statute, the constituent treaty that established the ICC (Banerjee, 2018). Later, President Bush, a Republican, revoked the signing of the Rome Statute. President Bush’s successor President Obama, a Democrat, established a cordial working relationship with the ICC. Finally, under President Trump, a Republican, the relationship between the USA and the ICC got to its worst point. The USA issued sanctions to the ICC and its officers. The USA has declined to join the ICC as it argues that American citizens will receive unfair treatment from the court (Kelley, 2019). Indeed, the US government has threatened to use force to rescue any American incarcerated under an ICC mandate.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The Pros and Cons for the United States to be a Member of the ICC
The main disadvantage of joining the ICC is the propensity for geopolitical embarrassment. The ICC issues indictments without reference to status. In recent years, it has issued indictments for two sitting presidents and a warrant of arrest for the president of Sudan (Van Schaack, 2015). Such a move would create embarrassment for the USA. Indeed, the ICC issues a warrant of arrest, the subject of such a warrant would be unable to travel as the Rome Statute binds constituent countries to effect the arrest. Among the advantages of joining the ICC is that the USA would be able to complain to the ICC for international crimes against its citizens. Secondly, the USA would gain respect in the international stage, as it would be embracing transparency (Mendes, 2019).
The argument for the USA joining the ICC
The USA should join the ICC for a variety of reasons. For a start, according to DeKeseredy & Dragiewicz (2018), the primary purpose of the ICC is to end impunity for international crimes. The USA, a nation that has played the role of an international police force in places such as Korea and Eastern Europe, should support the fight against impunity. Secondly, the USA should join the ICC, as its reasons for not joining the court are not plausible. It is unfair for the USA to support the ICC when it investigates citizens or even presidents of other nations, and then claim the court would be unfair to Americans. If the USA has concerns about the ICC, it can use its international influence to address the concerns.
Ramifications of USA Joining ICC on the USA and International Community
Among the potential ramifications of the USA joining the ICC would be the opening up of investigations in some of its international activities. There are pending reports about international crimes by the USA places such as Afghanistan. However, the USA can extinguish such investigations by conducting transparent investigations about such claims (Mendes, 2019). At the international level, of the USA joins the ICC, the nations that have not yet ratified the Rome Statute would be under pressure to do so. Expanded ratification of the Rome Statute would eliminate impunity in international crimes.
References
Banerjee, A. (2018). History of USA's relationship with International Criminal Court. Retrieved from https://www.iapss.org/2018/10/23/history-of-the-us-international-criminal-court-relations/ .
DeKeseredy, W. S., & Dragiewicz, M. (2018). Routledge handbook of critical criminology . New York: Routledge.
Kelley, J. (2019, April 8). Analysis | The U.S. revoked the visa for the ICC prosecutor. That bodes poorly for international criminal justice. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/04/08/us-revoked-visa-icc-prosecutor-that-bodes-poorly-international-criminal-justice/ .
Mendes, E. P. (2019). Peace and justice at the International Criminal Court . Cheltenham, United Kingdom: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Van Schaack, B. (2015, June 21). African Heads of State Before the International Criminal Court. Retrieved from https://www.international-criminal-justice-today.org/arguendo/african-heads-of-state-before-the-international-criminal-court/ .
