Reply #4: I share your frustration, but not your pessimism. [View All]

Look at the long view for just a second. Humanity has been faced with this issue since the first kingdoms: What are the unacceptable crimes by any leader, and how do you hold them to account?

Now after XX number of centuries, we have a nascent path to answering that. I don't expect it will work perfectly right out of the box.

The court is limited to considering consensus definitions of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. It is limited in scope by referrals from the UNSC, by acceptance of it's jurisdiction by signatories and when an investigation is requested by a State party. It can only step in when there is no ongoing case for the same crimes, and only act when countries themselves are unable or unwilling to investigate or prosecute.

In other words, it's not a substitute for the DoJ or the Senate, and not to be used in all cases were any similar crimes might have been committed. They have a staff of about 250.

It's also based on the idea that there is no cloak of sovereignty for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. That includes the Responsibility to Protect. The court is developing law which would define the crime of aggression, a law which would have covered both Iraq's invasion of Kuwait and Bush's invasion of Iraq.

I don't want to go on for hours, which I could. I can only hope you'll at least go to their website to learn more. You'll save yourself a lot of frustration when they do or do not take on the next case.

And remember that laws are not just about catching bad guys, they also eventually limit the arbitrary power of the cops.

http://www.icc-cpi.int/Menus/ICC/Home

I see I forgot to add the link to the prosecutor's statement:
http://www.icc-cpi.int/menus/icc/structure%20of%20the%20court/office%20of%20the%20prosecutor/reports%20and%20statements/statement/statement%20icc%20prosecutor%20press%20conference%20on%20libya%2016%20may%202011?lan=en-GB