Resources
Saturday, June 25, 2022
  • Login
Journalists for Justice
No Result
View All Result

Browse by Topic:

  • Home
  • Communities of Justice
  • Opinion & Analysis
  • Human Rights
  • Elections
  • About US
  • Our Work
  • Careers
No Result
View All Result
Journalists for Justice
  • Home
  • Communities of Justice
  • Opinion & Analysis
  • Human Rights
  • Elections
  • About US
  • Our Work
  • Careers
No Result
View All Result
Journalists for Justice
No Result
View All Result
Home ASP

America and the ICC: A return to the old ways?

Journalists For JusticebyJournalists For Justice
November 22, 2018
in ASP, Commentary, Opinion
Reading Time: 6 mins read
A A
0
America and the ICC: A return to the old ways?
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

By Jovan Djordjevic

America has always had a special status at the Assembly of State Parties(ASP) but the salvo unleashed by John Bolton this year indicates that it will not be business as usual in this year’s ASP.In the second installment of the continuing series of stories of the ASP, Journalists for Justice Jovan Djordjevic, provides a special coverage on America and the International Criminal Court.

After sweeping to power on a wave of populism many had failed to read, US President Donald Trump has shaken things up at home and across the Atlantic.

In less than two years since Trump’s presidential election campaign, what was once regarded as mere rhetoric by his electoral spin-doctors has materialized into concrete policies at the White House.
On September 10, 2018, the president’s national security advisor John Bolton laid out the tenets of the administration’s new course in foreign policy — in particular its hostile stance towards the International Criminal Court (ICC). Bolton referred to the court as “illegitimate”, and issued a threat: “The United States will use any means necessary to protect our citizens and those of our allies from unjust prosecution.”

He went on: “We will let the ICC die on its own. After all, for all intents and purposes, the ICC is already dead.”

RelatedStories

Selective approach to TRRC recommendations a sure recipe for defeating justice

Election of deputy prosecutors and review report high on agenda of ICC Assembly of States Parties session

COP26 failed to deliver, so ICC and ICJ the next stop for seekers of climate justice

The ICC has been lawfully established through the Rome Statute, an international treaty adopted in 1998, to which 123 states worldwide have appended their signatures to become parties.
The American government’s distrust of the court is nothing new, and the hostility towards the concept of universal justice has been evident even during previous administrations — namely during the tenure of former president George W. Bush. Going back in time, one might recall that the very ideas that underpinned the Bush administration’s policy towards the ICC were crafted by the very man who is now in charge of administering them under the current White House — John Bolton.

In the early days of the court’s establishment, it was he who spearheaded the effort to “unsign” the United States from the Rome Statute. It was also during Bolton’s tenure in the Bush administration (between 2001 and 2006) that the US introduced the “American Service members Protection Act” (ASPA). The law stipulates that its purpose is “to protect United States military personnel and other elected and appointed officials of the United States government against criminal prosecution by an international criminal court to which the United States is not party.” Essentially it authorizes America to use force in order to free its service members from custody in foreign jurisdictions. This is why the Act became popularly known as the “Hague Invasion Act”.

The ASPA gave the ICC an unintended popularity boost in The Netherlands. Citizens who had not been that interested in the ICC before phoned in during live radio programmes, scandalized at the idea of US navy ships appearing on the beaches of Scheveningen, ready to invade Holland.

Fast-forward to today, the sheer level of criticism and the harsh rhetoric directed at the ICC from the Trump administration bears a stark resemblance to the not too distant past. Bolton’s statements themselves may seem scathing, but they are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the new agenda that is currently being pursued by the White House, one which not only aims to halt the bit of cooperation with the ICC which was there during the Obama years (like when the US tried to help with attempts to arrest Ugandan warlord Joseph Kony and his cronies), but will also open the door to the sanctioning of its judges and staff by the US government.

One might wonder what catalyzed such a turn of events – until recently the ICC was considered to be a rather peripheral topic in the US political arena. However, things changed after the prosecutor announced that the court would be willing to launch investigations into the actions of American soldiers (among others) during the allied military intervention in Afghanistan since 2003.

For some, this might seem like a surprise. It is certainly unprecedented for Western powers like the US to attack the court in such a harsh and open way. Politicians of other countries such as the UK and France have good reason to oppose the court’s investigations into the war in Afghanistan, yet they have not challenged or attempted to sabotage the court and its work. Unsurprisingly, all of this comes as a shock to the western world, yet the public in many African states has been hearing such rhetoric for decades. Over the years, African leaders – both old and new — have used plenty of colourful language in their criticisms of the court.
In 2016, Uganda’s long-time President Yoweri Museveni referred to the ICC as “a bunch of useless people”. He subsequently condemned the ICC’s decision to launch an investigation into the Burundi conflict.  All this coincided with Burundi’s withdrawal from the ICC in 2017.
Likewise, across the continent, former South African President Jacob Zuma left a record of scathing criticism of the court and its functions. On numerous occasions throughout his nine-year rule, Zuma tried to cast doubt on the court’s effectiveness – branding it as a tool for “selective justice” and accusing it of being a “biased” institution without providing any credible evidence for his claims. This was followed by the Zuma administration’s refusal to carry out its duty to arrest one of the ICC’s prime suspects, Sudanese President Omar Al Bashir when he visited Pretoria in 2015. Such actions understandably culminated in a rapid souring of relations between one of Africa’s largest economies and the Hague-based court. It ultimately led to an attempt to withdraw South Africa from the ICC – a plan that would have succeeded had it not been for the the Guptagate scandal that toppled Zuma from power in 2018. The attempt to withdraw is not actively on the legislative agenda any more.

All of this goes to show that criticism of the court is nothing new. As with any judicial institution, the ICC’s very existence is bound to provoke anger from those who feel threatened by its mission. The United States under the Trump administration may be the latest (and definitely the strongest) government to challenge the ICC, but it is certainly not the first. The Philippines served notice on the UN secretary general of its intention to withdraw from the ICC in March 2018. As history has shown, criticism of international justice is usually levied by those who stand to lose most from a rules-based multilateral legal order. Instead of succumbing to uncertainty and despair over America’s decision to sabotage the ICC, the international community would be wise to remain resilient and publicly reaffirm its support for the court. As past experience shows, opposition to international justice comes and goes depending on who is in power – and when.

Previous Post

Justice, politics and money: Gearing up for the ICC’S annual ASP ritual again

Next Post

Checks and balances for non-activity of the ICC Prosecutor

Journalists For Justice

Journalists For Justice

Related Posts

Gambian Justice Minister Dawda Jallow released the Government White Paper on the Report of the Truth, Justice and Reparations Commision on May 25, 2022. Photo credit: Facebook

Selective approach to TRRC recommendations a sure recipe for defeating justice

June 2, 2022
Assembly of State Parties annual session. Photo Credit: @ICC-CPI

Election of deputy prosecutors and review report high on agenda of ICC Assembly of States Parties session

December 3, 2021
Empty seats in one of the two big plenary halls (accessible only via limited badges and special tickets for NGO observers) on Day 2. (Credit: Shirleen Chin)

COP26 failed to deliver, so ICC and ICJ the next stop for seekers of climate justice

December 2, 2021
Gambia's president, Adama Barrow. Photo: Twitter @BarrowPresident

Adama Barrow’s fight for political survival threatens Jammeh victims’ quest for justice

September 24, 2021
Former ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda. Photo: © Ilvy Njiokiktjien / VII

Despite challenges, ICC has affirmed role of law and norms in the international system

August 8, 2021
From left to right: the former and first African president of the ICCBA, Chief Charles Taku, former First Vice President of the ICC, Madam Justice Joyce Aluoch, the former President of ICCBA David Hooper, the ASP President, Judge Silvia Fernández de Gurmendi, and former Vice-President of ICCBA, Ghislain M. Mabanga. The photo was taken on 20 July 2016 © ICC-CPI

Fatou Bensouda: The challenges and the record

June 16, 2021
Next Post

Checks and balances for non-activity of the ICC Prosecutor

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Login
Notify of
Please login to comment
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
No Result
View All Result

Recent Posts

  • From Kyiv to Kabul and Darfur: Challenges of reporting justice and human rights
  • Gicheru to attend court session remotely
  • After euphoria of state white paper, victims now demand action on Jammeh
  • Right the Wrongs: Spotlight on the 2020 General Election in Tanzania
  • Selective approach to TRRC recommendations a sure recipe for defeating justice

Recent Comments

  • JFJ - Journalists for Justice on Kenyan lawyer denies bribery charges at the ICC
  • JFJ - Journalists for Justice on You did me wrong, Bemba tells ICC as he demands 70 million euros
  • JFJ - Journalists for Justice on Two victims’ lawyers in Kenyatta case in line to become next ICC prosecutor
  • JFJ - Journalists for Justice on Profiles of the four people shortlisted for the job of ICC Prosecutor
  • Write My Essay on Afghanistan case fails to take off at the ICC — pragmatism’ or surrender to the powerful?

Archives

Categories

JFJ – Journalists for Justice

We call out impunity wherever it occurs; we advocate justice for all victims of atrocity crimes; and we work with people of goodwill everywhere who share our values.

Browse by Topics:

Archives by Month:

Never Again
INTAHE
BarometreVerite
The Victims' Bantaba
No Result
View All Result
  • Confronting Impunity
  • Communities of Justice
  • Opinion
  • About US
  • Our Work
  • Login

Copyright © 2019. Journalists for Justice has asserted its right to be recognized as creators and owners of the content here. Reproduction in part or in whole is permitted on condition that JFJ is acknowledged and notified.

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In
wpDiscuz