Make Law Not War

By Ferencz, Benjamin B. | The World Today, June 1998 | Go to article overview

Make Law Not War


Ferencz, Benjamin B., The World Today


After years of UN debate, a treaty to establish a permanent international criminal court may be ready for signature in Rome in July. It is still uncertain whether agreement can be reached and which countries will sign, ratify and enforce the treaty. The international legal community is itself now on trial.

THE WORLDIS ON THE THRESHOLD of closing a glaring gap in the international legal order. Over fifty years ago, the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg denounced and punished aggression, crimes against humanity and massive war crimes as offences that would be condemned wherever they occurred. There was an implied promise that `Never Again' would genocide go unpunished.

The United Nations agreed unanimously and the Nuremberg principles became binding international law. But there was no permanent international court to try future war criminals. Nations went back to killing as usual. Cold-war rivalries and entrenched notions of sovereignty eroded the political will to bring genocidal national leaders to impartial justice.

All nations now seem to agree in principle that a permanent International Criminal Court (ICC) is needed, but there are considerable problems still to be overcome. The declared goal is to create a world criminal court that is `fair, efficient and effective' - which to some means a court that will not interfere with perceived national interests. There's the rub! Current drafts reflect continuing reluctance of powerful states to yield any significant segments of their power.

There is agreement that the ICC can only come into play when national courts are unwilling or unable to bring suspects to fair trial, but the criteria of inability and who decides that question are still in dispute. Some countries want the right to `opt-in' or `opt-out' of answerability for certain crimes. Some argue that states whose nationals are involved, as perpetrators, victims or captors, must give their consent before the ICC can try the accused. They fail to recognise that crimes of great magnitude almost invariably require official complicity and the accomplice could hardly be expected to try itself.

The United States, mindful of its conservative Senate and a reluctant Pentagon, insists that Security Council permission must be obtained before the ICC takes action. Those without veto rights in the Council resist every assertion of special privilege. They fear, quite rightly, that complete Security Council control will destroy the independence of the Tribunal. Since the Council's rights and duties are set by the UN Charter and cannot be decreased or enlarged without amending it, there seems no compelling reason to reaffirm existing Charter rights or assert powers that go beyond Charter authorisation.

JUSTICE A LA CARTE

The Council demonstrated its power when, in a matter of weeks, it created two ad hoc tribunals, based in The Hague, to deal with massive human rights violations in former Yugoslavia after 1991 and with genocide in Rwanda in 1992. If the Rome treaty route should fail or falter, the Security Council may be the only alternative to bring international criminals to speedy trial.

Despite great difficulties - notably the failure of states to arrest leading perpetrators - The Hague criminal tribunals have been earning increasing respect and deserve greater support. But a string of special courts created a la carte, and restricted to certain crimes in defined areas during a limited time, can hardly be the best way to establish universal justice.

CORE CRIMES

It is generally agreed that only a few `core crimes' of major significance to the world community should be dealt with by the new court. Other crimes, such as terrorism and drug-trafficking may be added later. Whether aggressive war - the crime against peace - will be included in the treaty is still being discussed.

Mistrust of a politicised Security Council is one reason advanced by those who argue that aggressive war - condemned at Nuremberg as `the supreme international crime' - should not be subject to judicial review. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Make Law Not War
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.