Why the I.C.C. Does Not Work

    The ICC is an international organization with a mission to prosecute individuals for high international

crimes. In total, the court has indicted 45 people for crimes ranging from war crimes to genocide. While 

the ICC on paper appears as a very effective and positive institution in our world, there is a great deal of 

reform that needs to take place for the institution to actually become effective in its mission. 

    The first shortcoming of the ICC as an organization is that major powerhouse nations are not involved 

in the organization, which raises questions about the legitimacy of the organization. Firstly, the lack of 

presence in the ICC from the United States, China, Russia, and most of the rest of Asia means that the ICC 

does not have the backing of major world powers, and that a lot of things and crimes that go on in those 

countries are left unchecked. Another shortcoming and poor result of this lack of large countries leads to 

increased ‘picking on’ poorer, less developed countries usually in Africa. 
        
    The second shortcoming of the organization as a whole is the fact that there have been long standing 

issues in terms of the court’s process in itself, and that the court cannot solve issues in places such as 

Africa itself. Primarily, certain regions of Africa are very politically unstable, and people such as dictators 

usually crop up one after another. So, in this region, it would be very hard for the court to do any effective 

work in the region.   

Comments

  1. I agree with you that there are many shortcomings in the I.C.C. I think that you make a important point that the US and other major powerhouses not being involved really makes the court lack any sort of backing. And you other point that the courts really struggle to solve problems in areas with political unrest ads to the downsides of this court. I think that lastly your point on how this court could lead to stronger countries taking advantage of smaller ones is very important.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I completely agree with the points you have made. The ICC has no real affective way to enforce their verdicts, and without the US involvement they are substantially less powerful. It is questionable how the ICC would be taken seriously at all without the major powerhouse that is the US involvement. Since there are also great disparities between the court's processes in different question, ICC is not even fair in its own proceedings. The ICC needs major revisions before we it can truly be viewed as effective.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree that the I.C.C. is not successful at the momentary state. It needs reforms to make it an influential player in world politics. One appealing idea is that the I.C.C. should empower regional and national courts more to be able adapt to regional peculiarities. However, we need to see it in a larger context. In general, international organizations, not only the I.C.C., have difficulties in executing their will.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sports and Politics can no longer be separated