“[Speaker Johnson] said that if the ICC is allowed to threaten Israel's leaders, then we know that America will be next. Our response is: Of course!" Pandor exclaimed.
The US didn’t sign on to the treaty that creates the ICC’s jurisdiction. In most countries, you still need to at least pretend to have jurisdiction to bring criminal charges. Unlike people, states can only be sued to the degree they consent to be sued. It’s what sovereign immunity is based on and it’s a very double-edged sword.
Also, outside of a few warlords, the ICC is pretty bad at enforcing international law because they have no way to do so. The ICC is inefficient and slow. Someone has to actually bring the defendant to them to stand trial, then countries negotiate over who doesn’t have to deal with jailing the person if they’re convicted.
It’s also arguably super imperialist, given that it was designed by a bunch of Western powers and has mostly been used to enforce international law against individuals from Africa. The two Russians who are being “prosecuted,” Putin and Lvova-Belova, can’t be detained because the ICC has no power to enforce their warrants. Granted, these people are often evil, but it’s not like the West doesn’t have its fair share of evil people.
All that to say, while this looks good, it’s mostly just PR. We also arguably don’t want the ICC prosecuting Americans. We should instead make our domestic system better.
Source: Used to work on analyzing ICC cases and I’ve read thousands of filings from various cases. It’s a well-intentioned but highly flawed system that is basically only designed to prosecute international crimes in Africa and doesn’t really focus on anything else.
Neither are the Israelis, but that doesn’t matter, because Palestine is. Well, I say that, but to be fair the US isn’t directly operating in Palestinian territory, “merely” aiding and abetting Israeli operations. I personally feel that should count, but I won’t be the one arguing in court. 🤷
If you mean us, we aren’t an ICC member.
I don’t see how that is relevant. It’s a problem that we’re not party to the ICC.
I didn’t ratify my city’s bullshit zoning laws but they’re still a threat to me
The US didn’t sign on to the treaty that creates the ICC’s jurisdiction. In most countries, you still need to at least pretend to have jurisdiction to bring criminal charges. Unlike people, states can only be sued to the degree they consent to be sued. It’s what sovereign immunity is based on and it’s a very double-edged sword.
Also, outside of a few warlords, the ICC is pretty bad at enforcing international law because they have no way to do so. The ICC is inefficient and slow. Someone has to actually bring the defendant to them to stand trial, then countries negotiate over who doesn’t have to deal with jailing the person if they’re convicted.
It’s also arguably super imperialist, given that it was designed by a bunch of Western powers and has mostly been used to enforce international law against individuals from Africa. The two Russians who are being “prosecuted,” Putin and Lvova-Belova, can’t be detained because the ICC has no power to enforce their warrants. Granted, these people are often evil, but it’s not like the West doesn’t have its fair share of evil people.
All that to say, while this looks good, it’s mostly just PR. We also arguably don’t want the ICC prosecuting Americans. We should instead make our domestic system better.
Source: Used to work on analyzing ICC cases and I’ve read thousands of filings from various cases. It’s a well-intentioned but highly flawed system that is basically only designed to prosecute international crimes in Africa and doesn’t really focus on anything else.
Neither are the Israelis, but that doesn’t matter, because Palestine is. Well, I say that, but to be fair the US isn’t directly operating in Palestinian territory, “merely” aiding and abetting Israeli operations. I personally feel that should count, but I won’t be the one arguing in court. 🤷