Strengthening the International Criminal Court

Topic: Strengthening the International Criminal Court
Country: Brazil
Delegate Name: Tom Allen
School: Roeper School

The International Criminal Court was created in 1998 in Rome, Italy. A few important issues of the ICC include its jurisdiction (which cases it can try) and the extent to which it can punish criminals that it convicts. The ICC was granted is jurisdiction largely by a statute created in 2002 outlying what conveys a crime with the severity of being sent to the ICC. The Statute also calls for the ICC to be reviewed once every seven years to determine its effectiveness and find possible ideas for reform. The last review session for the ICC was held in 2010.

The International Criminal Court was established to try in court the criminals responsible for the most heinous international crimes. The ICC does not have the authority to detain or bring criminals to the court. A nation must arrest a criminal on their own and remit them to be tried in the ICC. A key weakness in the ICC is that China, India, Russia, and the United States have not ratified the Rome Statute and thus are not members of the ICC.

Brazil was the sixty-ninth nation in the world to ratify the Rome Statute, creating the ICC. Brazil signed the statute on February 7th 2000 and ratified on June 20th 2002. Brazil openly rejected the first Bilateral Immunity Agreement on September 4, 2002. A BIA prohibits nations within the agreement from submitting citizens of the other nation to the ICC. Brazil currently has BIA agreements only with other South American countries in the MERCOSUR group. These agreements were established in the MERCOSUR common position, signed by Brazil on June 20th, 2005.

Brazil sees the issue of strengthening the ICC as a double edged sword. When more power is given to the ICC, this gives the court greater potential of invading national sovereignty. When the power and effectiveness of the ICC is restrained, more criminals will go without punishment. This committee needs to find the right balance between the two positions. Brazil is against the increase of UN and Western involvement in the affairs of smaller nations. At the same time, we are also in favor of creating peace in the world and convicting criminals who cause great international harm and disregard the UN’s UDHR. Brazil encourages the Security Council to strengthen the ability of the ICC to punish criminals they find guilty, but cautions the committee against increasing the Court’s jurisdiction. Granting the ICC to take more cases would cause more criminals to be charged, could reduce the Court’s overall effectiveness, and could lead to an invasion of national sovereignty.

Brazil hopes to find the proper balance between strengthening and taking away from the ICC and looks forward to working with other willing nations to solve this problem.

Topic: Strengthening the International Criminal Court
Country: China
Delegate Name: Rima Mandwee
School: Mattawan High School

The major powers who refuse to be bound to the proceedings of the International Criminal Court agree with the theory of the court. For a plethora of other reasons though, some cannot agree to be bound by it or ask others to succumb to the decisions of the court. Other nations who oppose the court have expressed concerns for politically motivated prosecution and interference with national sovereignty. China, as a nation not concerned with military commitments overseas or on international territories, does not oppose the court for fear of its own military being seized under the courts. As enforced in various international struggles, China is not a nation that finds it appropriate to pressure countries into signing bilateral agreements or agreeing to an international court's standard. China has always advocated non-intervention tactics for internal affairs, and holds firm a belief that issues held under the scope of the International Criminal Court could also be facilitated on a nation to nation basis given proper cooperation tactics and peaceful agreements.

In previous disputes where war crime charges were being discussed, China feared retaliation from those being prosecuted. For example, when war crime charges were pressed against Sudanese President Oman Hassan al-Bashir through the International Criminal Court, China feared the consequences impacting peace processes in Sudan. These effects are why China is reluctant to support such a court; there is no way to trace where the political influence comes from or ends up. Participation from the United Nations and the Security Council are meant to evoke peace on international playing fields, not evoke international interference. The International Criminal Court could weaken the power of the Security Council in the shift of focus; peaceful negotiations to prosecutions. China stands firm on the belief that the issues brought to the International Criminal Court need to be discussed and negotiated in a peaceful manner, but no nation should be bound to the power of an international court's judge. Our international field is one with the capability to conduct proper trials individually. China will continuously second that no court or nation can judge whether a state is able to hold a proper trial of its own.

Topic: Strengthening the International Criminal Court
Country: Colombia
Delegate Name: Duyen Nguyen
School: Fishers High School

5 August 2002, the Republic of Colombia ratified the *Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court* and has joined the efforts of a plethora of nations in the attempt to castigate the offenders of crimes against humanity. However, throughout the country of Colombia minority voices have declared that the ICC is only a criminal court and our Republic should not partake in this ICC because of the nonsupport from the United States, as well as the contradiction it appears to have in accordance to the Colombian Constitution.

Taking into account of the views from the Colombian people, the Republic of Colombia have heavily considered the allegations against the ICC and have decided that the benefits are more advantageous. The reason being is due to the fact that in the 1980’s and 1990’s more than 1,000 members of a Colombian political party were assassinated , making this a form of political genocide, and under Article 6 of the Rome Statute it is a crime against humanity. Any crimes committed after the date of 5 August 2002 can be prosecuted by the Courts.

However, powerful countries such as United States, China, and the Russian Federation have yet to endorse the ICC Statute. Reasons being are possibly the same reasons as to why India has yet to ratify the ICC Statute. The belief that the ICC will be the highest jurisdiction and be above all other courts set in the states and nations.

The Republic of Colombia truly believes that this Security Council committee should work to make the Rome Statute the guidelines the ICC has; in addition, the people of Colombia strongly feel that the ICC can only be strengthened if it is made as an entity working with the government not against it. In Article 15, clause one it states that investigations can be made proprio motu. The Republic of Colombia strongly believes that the ICC should not only make investigations on the Courts jurisdiction, but also with the jurisdiction within the Courts and with the government of the country. Colombia would also look favorably upon the use of NGOs, such as Amnesty International, to be a mediator between the ICC and nations about human rights conflicts and violations.

The true principle of the ICC insinuates that nations cannot achieve peace, without first achieving justice. The Republic of Colombia calls upon the cooperation of this committee to discuss the crimes against humanity as stated throughout Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in articles such as Articles 6, 7, and 8. The country of Colombia hopes for a consensus to be reached though the discourse of these committee sessions.

###### 1 Castaneda, Sebastian. Colombia Reports. Colombia News, Sports, Culture, and Travel. *Colombia should Welcome the International Criminal Court* 03 November 2009. Web. 19 November 2011.

Topic: Strengthening the International Criminal Court
Country: France
Delegate Name: Bob Wang
School: Forest Hills Northern High School

The role of the International Criminal Court, or ICC, is to help end impunity for the perpetrators of the most serious crimes of concern to the international community; crimes include: genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and crimes of aggression. The ICC is the first treaty-based, permanent, international criminal court and also is an independent international organization, which means it is not part of the United Nations. Not being apart of any league, union, or group means that membership and support for the ICC comes directly from the choice and belief of the individual country. Thus, as more countries join and support the ICC, the stronger its rulings will be upheld.

The French Republic has signed and ratified the Rome Statute and has become one of the 117 states that are states parties to the Statute of the Court. France fully supports the ICC and its role as an international persecutor against inhumane crimes.

Ideally, the best way for the ICC to rule would be with the support of every nation. However, issues such as national sovereignty and the possible persecution of their own nation have caused countries, such as the United States, the Russian Federation, and the People’s Republic of China, to refuse to support the ICC. However, France recognizes the restraint of the ICC, which only allows them to persecute certain crimes. Therefore, allowing for national sovereignty to remain intact. The French Republic urges countries like the United States to set aside petty thoughts like yours and mine and believe in a future of world peace, where nations work together and support each other, and in order to do so, supporting the ICC is the first step.

Topic: Strengthening the International Criminal Court
Country: Gabon
Delegate Name: Andrea Clinton
School: Royal Oak High School

The Gabonese Republic feels as though several of the issues which arise in discussing the jurisdiction of the ICC stem from a misunderstanding of its duties outlined in the Rome Statute. Personally recognizing the ICC, we believe that its existence is crucial in promoting accountability and justice. By clearly reiterating its powers and restructuring minor structural flaws, the ICC can – and should – be strengthened and fully recognized by the international community.

Outside of the cooperative efforts of the Security Council, the ICC cannot be significantly strengthened without unanimous support (especially from highly influential and prosperous nations). In the past, several nations have failed to ratify the Rome Statute because of fears that its jurisdiction would in some way encroach on the ability of a sovereign nation to prosecute its own criminals. In reality, the ICC can only try a criminal when a government is unwilling or unable to do so. Any nation with a credible, legitimate judicial body would theoretically never have to surrender a criminal to the ICC, so long as they properly penalized them.

To encourage nations which currently do not recognize the ICC to reconsider, some sort of incentive should be offered – a possible idea is granting lowered interest rates for loan payments. Without some sort of individual gain, it would be difficult to gain the attention of those nations – especially when considering the tumultuous economic and political state of the world at large.

Another common conflict point for the ICC revolves around the idea of amnesty. Because the Rome Statute does not adequately assign any sort of parameters around this, it is our duty as the Security Council to set them ourselves. An effective method of granting amnesty could be to only grant it with an exchange of information. In other words, the details of the event(s) which led to this prosecution would have to be disclosed before amnesty could be granted. Because valuable information will be gained from such an exchange, the ICC would be able to move more swiftly through prosecutions, while also creating a database of information which can be used to evaluate future scenarios, therefore fostering efficiency and cooperation.

Topic: Strengthening the International Criminal Court
Country: Germany
Delegate Name: Lane Lesko
School: Ann Arbor Community High School

On July 17, 1998, there was a conference in Rome, Italy that would change the world forever. The international criminal court where made to try international war criminals. It has world jurisdiction and the power to try any criminal that commits a crime serious enough to be brought to the attention of the International Criminal Courts, which shall hence forth for the purpose of this paper be called the ICC.

The statute that dictates the parameters in which this court should operate in is hence forth to be called The Statute. The Statute was brought into action on July 1st, 2002. One of the first judges to serve was a German. His name was Hans-Peter Kaul. The ICC currently has a staff of over 700 people.

When the ICC was originally introduced The Federal Republic of Germany voted yes. The headquarters of the ICC are at The Hague in the Netherlands. The court has jurisdictions in all of the following categories; the crime of genocide; crimes against humanity; war crimes; the crime of aggression.

According to Hans-Peter Kaul in the piece THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT: CURRENT CHALLENGES AND PERSPECTIVES there are three major problems facing the ICC as are as follows:

First, the ICC must continue to consolidate its ongoing development into an efficient and professional international organization and, at the same time, into a functioning and credible international court. It also remains essential that the ICC continue to show, through the way it conducts all its activities, that it is a purely judicial, objective, neutral and nonpolitical institution.

Second, the Prosecutor and his office as the driving force of the ICC bear a special responsibility. In this respect, let me share with you a saying, which I have picked up from the young people at our Court. They say— and you can hear this quite often—: “The Office of the Prosecutor is the engine, professional and effective investigations are the fuel for the entire Court.” In more legal terms: the Rome Statute and the ICC Rules of Procedure and Evidence set up the legal framework for the work of the Office of the Prosecutor. The Prosecutor and his Office are called upon to use this legal framework for, firstly, the sustained build-up of an organization which is as efficacious as possible, and secondly, the continued development of professional and efficient working methods, with clear goals and priorities, in particular with regard to investigations. The efficiency of the work of the Office of the Prosecutor is essential for the Court as a whole. Without professional and efficient working methods, without an Office of the Prosecutor, which carries out its duties in an optimal manner, the ICC cannot function.

Third, it is obvious that the Court cannot be successful without active and steadfast support from states parties, not only in word but also, more importantly, in concrete deed. States parties must draw appropriate conclusions from the well-known fact that the Court has no executive powers, no police, no armed forces or other executive mechanisms.

Consequently, states parties and the Court must in a foreseeable future develop a new system of best practices of effective criminal cooperation.

In conclusion, Mr. Kaul is correct there are some flaws with the court and we wish do address these topics, and do what we can within our boundaries to remedy some of these issues.

Topic: Strengthening the International Criminal Court
Country: India
Delegate Name: Issac Ross
School: Forest Hills Eastern High School

Currently, 116 countries have agreed the guidelines, with limited ratifications, set forth by the International Criminal Court (ICC). There are four major problems that the International Criminal Court has faced since it was established in 2002 which limits its productivity in prosecuting International laws such as: human rights laws and war laws. Many major countries such as the United States, Russian Federation, and the People’s Republic of China have decided not to sign on to the agreements presented forth by the ICC which excludes them from the laws and regulations being protected by the ICC. Furthermore, many countries that have signed on to the ICC have not ratified the regulations causing them to not be bound to the regulations that are presented by the ICC. By doing this, they are a part of the ICC but are not bound by its tenants. Lastly, and possibly the most important problem is the fact that many countries believe their national sovereignty is at stake by giving the ICC jurisdiction over their own national courts.

India abstained from the vote in Rome in 1998 for these multiple different reasons. India, also, would find the ICC to be a more effective, more reliable judicial system if the ICC had an opt-in provision where a nation could belong to the ICC and adhere to its regulations but only for a specified amount of time so countries may capitalize on the opportunities given by the ICC without being permanently bound to the ICC, but, because this was not an option, India believes the ICC holds a possible threat to its national sovereignty because of its powers over national courts. Furthermore, the fear of how an International Court may judge the current Indian way of investigation, prosecution, and criminal proceedings played a major factor in India’s choice to abstain. Another raised concern is that the definition of conflicts and what the ICC is allowed to be involved or not involved in is a major concern to India and its national right to dealing with its own conflicts. Last but not least, the fear that of the western powers possible use of the ICC as a political foothold to gain strength and power instead of using it for its justice and righteous reasons. If the ICC were to be altered to allow for the change of such problems, which would only benefit the majority and strengthen the power of justice on international crimes whilst also protecting national sovereignty, then India would be more comfortable signing on with the ICC and cooperating with its existing parties.

Every country would agree with the addition of regulations that help protect national sovereignty, these additions would have to be discussed and debated to make sure that they apply to all fairly. Furthermore, the strengthening of the ICC, both with the addition of members and the clarification of regulations, would benefit greatly each nation involved.Many countries would disagree with the current policies in place because of the threat to their national sovereignty and because they want to prosecute their own prisoners. Furthermore, some of the major countries may not want to get involved because they wish to control their own prisoners and their own judicial systems without being scrutinized by an international court.

Topic: Strengthening the International Criminal Court
Country: Lebanon
Delegate Name: Michael Stinavage
School: Mattawan High School

The Coalition for the International Criminal Court and its members have been calling on Lebanon to make a commitment to international justice and the rule of law by acceding to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) as soon as possible. In light of the tragic violence that has swept across the country since February of last year, ending impunity is of paramount importance. The Court feels that if Lebanon joined at this moment, it would send an unmistakable signal in favor of justice and accountability, and offer Lebanon a strong hope for lasting peace and security.

Lebanon questions aspects of the ICC such as it pertaining to the Israel- Lebanon conflict of 2006. However, President Michel Sleiman reiterates Lebanon’s commitment to honor the obligations to the U.N.-backed Special Tribunal for Lebanon, including its funding.

Sleiman also claims, “This is in addition to our obligation to abide by the resolutions of the international legitimacy, including that pertaining to the Special International Tribunal for Lebanon, and that to attain justice and the ultimate truth, and preserve our credibility.” This special tribunal refers to the investigation by the council of the assasination of of former Lebanese prime minister, Rafiq Al-Hariri.

There has been some unrest involving how Lebanon would handle being the eye of the public, yet Lebanon holds true to their stance involving the strengthening and implementation of the International Criminal Court.

Of the 119 countries that are States Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal court, the Lebanese Republic is not a member.

Topic: Strengthening the International Criminal Court
Country: Nigeria
Delegate Name: Katie Bollman
School: Williamston High School

As a nation that has struggled in the past with border disputes, the resolution of which were aided immeasurably by the International Court of Justice, we are able to say with certainty that this sort of program is effective and helpful in our pursuit of a peaceful world. For this reason, and many others, we fully support the existing ICC and any revisions that may be made to foster increased successes.

Nigeria firmly believes that if a society is to progress well the rights of the most vulnerable citizens must be protected, and this protection must be enforced. The only way that this will be realized is through the successful implementation of international law. Over the years there have been numerous ludicrous acts against humanity that have claimed the lives of millions and permanently scarred even more. Though we all hope that these acts will not occur again, preventative steps must be taken. Nigeria believes that the Rome Statute acts as a deterrent. Through the Rome Statute of the ICC, if these acts do occur they may be properly addressed. To strengthen the ICC, Nigeria strongly urges all nations to join the Rome Statute.

Nigeria does not see this as infringement upon national sovereignty due to the steps taken to ensure the powers of the individual states, however it should be stressed that the ICC should not be used excessively. Individual nations have the right to develop their own laws in accordance with their own values, and Nigeria stands by this right. National Sovereignty is currently protected in man ways under the Rome Statute, which Nigeria has supported since 2001. For example, as written, states must consent to providing captivity to a criminal—the Court does not hold the power to impose this.

In conclusion Nigeria would like to stress once again its ongoing commitment to the existing ICC, but urge our fellow nations to wholeheartedly join in the prevention and appropriate reaction to heinous crimes. The first step in this is making a unified commitment to follow the directions laid out by the Rome Statute.

Topic: Strengthening the International Criminal Court
Country: Portugal
Delegate Name: John Bihn
School: Saginaw Arts and Sciences Academy

Portugal has been an ardent supporter of the idea of an International Criminal Court (ICC) ever since its creation by the Rome Statute. After years of consideration, the Rome Statute was brought into effect upon the ratification of the Statute by the 60th member states on July 1, 2002. From that point forward, the ICC has acted as a body in order to prosecute individuals for the gravest of war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity. Many discussions about the Court’s role in the world have followed, with the most recent of which being the ICC Review Conference in Kampala.

There are several important clarifications that must be made about the ICC. Primarily, there is an overwhelming impression that the ICC unwillingly impedes the national sovereignty of UN members. It must be made clear that the ICC was not and is not designed to infringe upon national sovereignty, and in fact cannot interfere with non-consenting member states and non-member states alike. Additionally, there is great fear that the Court will be used as a political tool to prosecute individuals for political reasons. Portugal emphasizes that this indeed is not the case, and is strongly opposed to such a use of the ICC.

Portugal understands that several countries are still reluctant to give their full support to the ICC. However, Portugal strongly believes that the best remedy to the majority of the court’s problems is through the recognition of the court by all members of the United Nations. Bearing this in mind, Portugal encourages all non-member states to reopen discussions of ratification of the Rome Statute. Portugal believes that by keeping an open mind towards ratification, the members of the Security Council will be able to constructively assist the ICC.

Topic: Strengthening the International Criminal Court
Country: Russia
Delegate Name: Jillian Hamersma
School: Forest Hills Central High School

Thirty-two countries, including Russia, have signed but not ratified the Rome Statute. The law of treaties obliges these states to refrain from “acts which would defeat the object and purpose” of the treaty. Russia mainly believes that the Rome Statue is a matter of national sovereignty. Just as with the issue of Syria, Russia trusts that most problems should be dealt with internally as to not upset the fragile structure of the world. Russia sees a problem in the fact that three of the big five nations do not agree with the statute. If three very unique nations with very different governments have all not even ratified the current statute, than why should the United Nations even consider strengthening the International Criminal Court (ICC)?

If anything, the Security Council should discuss how to water down the Rome Statute in order to get more nations on board. Because many nations (Russia included) have signed but not ratified the Rome Protocol, that act alone reveals that these countries do in fact support the principle of the International Criminal Court; they just do not want to be bound to it. The Russian Federation has long been an activist for national sovereignty, and thus, the nation will not abandon these beliefs now. The International Criminal Court should not have an authority that can surpass that of the individual country’s responsibility and jurisdiction. In order to give the Rome Statue at least some sort of legitimacy, the Security Council must find a way to get every country (especially the permanent members) to endorse the edict.

At the moment, the ability of the ICC is being capped by the lack of acceptance by the United States, the Russian Federation, and the People’s Republic of China. All three of these big five nations believe their own national sovereignty is at stake by the jurisdiction of the ICC. These countries have grown to be major world powers individually and so, they would not want anything to threaten their status. These nations are imperative to the solidity of Earth.

It seems that the United Kingdom supports the strengthening of the International Criminal Court wholeheartedly. The nation signed the Roman Statute quite early November 30, 1998 and ratified it on October 4, 2001. The Russia Federation, on the other hand, Russia signed the statute on September 13, 2000 but has not ratified it. Mr. Churkin of the Russian Federation was recorded saying on December 3, 2008 that “steps taken…to create [a nation’s] own capacity to investigate crimes that fall within the jurisdiction of the ICC should be encouraged.” So, the Russian Federation supports an International Criminal Court, just not an overbearing one.

Topic: Strengthening the International Criminal Court
Country: South Africa

The Republic of South Africa believes that it will be a fruitless endeavor to attempt to tailor the International Criminal Court to fit the desires and constitutions of all existing governments. Within the Security Council there exists too many issues that prohibit individual nations from ratifying the Rome Statute, whether political or constitutional, for the Council to attempt to augment the Statute without removing essential portions of the document. Furthermore, it is not in our power as the Security Council to amend the Rome Statute, this must be done with a two-thirds majority vote of the State Parties, and will only enter into force with seven-eighths of the State Parties ratification. We can, however, suggest amendments to be made, or to be considered by the ICC.

It is South Africa’s conviction that the Court should investigate the use of and perhaps utilize truth commissions and the option of amnesty. South Africa recognizes that in some cases brought before the Court an indictment results in more bloodshed and violence by a criminal who feels threatened. In Africa this is especially prevalent. Members of the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda and the Sudanese President al-Bashir have all declined peaceful negotiations or the cease of hostilities due to outrage of indictments or fear of arrest once hostilities conclude. We must weigh the cost of justice against the price of human lives.

Amnesty is also an avenue that should be considered. After the fall if apartheid in South Africa, Nelson Mandela instituted a Truth and Reconciliation Commission that granted amnesty to the perpetrators of apartheid in exchange for a confession of the crimes they committed. When our nation was in such a transitional state, as are many African nations now, granting amnesty and perhaps imposing exile is more economically feasible and conducive to peace.

Topic: Strengthening the International Criminal Court
Country: United Kingdom
Delegate Name: Charles Rudner
School: Fishers High School

Being a member of the International Criminal Court, the people of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern find that strengthening this court will not only improve the power of the United Nations but also aide in removing possible perjury. Although the people would be accepting of strengthening the International Criminal Court, there are concerns over allegations against NATO. As a large monetary contributor to NATO, the United Kingdom would prefer that the International Criminal Court’s powers be limited to the Rome Statue, focusing on allegations towards individuals and state parties.

Throughout the International Criminal Court’s nine years of trial, the United Kingdom has not had a British citizen who was accused, but the United Kingdom has been involved in events that became investigations of the International Criminal Court. Uganda, a former colony of the United Kingdom, is currently undergoing a crisis in which crimes against humanity and war crimes because of the Lord’s Resistance Army participation in Uganda. Concerned over the results of these trials, the people of the United Kingdom wish to see that those involved are fairly imprisoned with the appropriate sentences, since the International Criminal Court does not sentence the death penalty.

Recently with the Arab Spring movements, the International Criminal Court has begun sending cases, specifically concerning Libya, to the Security Council due to Article 13 of the Rome Statute which refers to Article 5 which gives jurisdiction to the Security Council over crimes of aggression when necessary. In order to avoid these situations in which trials must transition through a mirage of tribunals it is necessary to create guidelines that refer to a single tribunal, one that the International Criminal Court could morph into. In this revised court, the people of the United Kingdom find that trials be effective and performed without illogical or eccentric motions. Along with effectiveness this court must also perform trials in a manner that provides the appropriate sentence for the guilty with considerations from the accuser. Should there be no decision from the court, then the proceedings mentioned in Article 76 of the Rome Statue shall stand. The people of the United Kingdom are certain that this court system will be more efficient and clear than the current one and believe that International Criminal Court can achieve greatness only through unity.