THE INTERNATIONAL

CRIMINAL COURT

By : Santiago Reolalas
Maria Linda Raras

The International Criminal Court

(ICC)
The ICC was established in 1998 and came into
force on 1 July 2002, following ratification of the
Rome Statute by 60 states. It consists of 18
judges that are elected by secret ballot and is
based in The Hague, Netherlands.
The ICC is an independent international
organisation NOT LINKED to the UN.
By 2011, 108 states had ratified the Rome
Statute.
The ICC is a permanent court with global
jurisdiction and the power to try individuals
accused of the most atrocious crimes, including

The court can exercise its authority over crimes

committed within the boundaries of any state party to
the Rome Statute. However, the court can only try crimes
committed since 1 July 2001, when the Statute entered
into force.
The four aims of the ICC are to:
Ensure the worst perpetrators are held accountable for
their crimes
Serve as a court of last resort that can investigate,
prosecute and punish the perpetrators of genocide,
crimes against humanity and war crimes
Assist national judiciaries in investigating and
prosecuting the worst perpetrators, allowing states to
be the first to investigate and prosecute
Help promote international peace and security by

Opposition to the ICC

The ICC has seldom achieved its aims in the past
decade, battling a lack of state support, with global
powers such as the United Nations, Russia and
China refusing to ratify the Rome Statute.
Detractors of the International Criminal Court have
too prevented the effective achievement of its aim,
with many African Nations reluctant to carry out
arrest warrants issued by the court.
Arab and Muslim states are suspicious of the court,
concerned that it is a tool of Western justice,
impeding the work of the ICC in countries such as
Libya.

However, the Security Councils referral of Libyas

violent crackdown on pro-democracy protests to the ICC
suggests that the effectiveness of the Court may
increase.

The Prosecutors attempts to prosecute Libyas

Muammar Gaddafi, has been particularly contested, and
the African Union has decided not to enforce ICC arrest
warrants for the leader.

The ICC in
Libya
On February 26, 2011, U.N. Security Council Resolution 1970
referred the situation in Libya to the ICC. This action provides
the ICC with jurisdiction over war crimes, crimes against
humanity, and genocide occurring in Libya since that date,
even though Libya is not a state party to the Rome Statute.
The United States voted in favour of the resolution, the
first time it has done so in referring an issue to the ICC.
ICC President Sang-Hyun Song, suggested in April. that
the Libya investigation had placed significant pressure
on the Courts budget, which could potentially
impede the Courts ability to advance its
existing prosecutions or examinations of new
situations.

ICC Warrants in
Libya
Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi (Libyan de facto Prime Minister)
Warrants of Arrest: issued on 27 June 2011
Abdullah Al-Senussi (Colonel in the Libyan Armed Forces)
Warrants of Arrest: issued on 27 June 2011
Muammar Gaddafi (Libyan Head of State)
Termination of the case: 22 November 2011, following his death

The death of Muammar Gaddafi in October 2011 and

the disappearance of Abdullah Al-Senussi following
the issuing of an ICC warrant on 27 June 2011have
meant that the ICC has failed in its aim of prosecuting
the perpetrators of genocide, crimes against humanity
and war crimes in Libya.
Saif Al-Islam Gaddafis capture has been confirmed by
the ICC who has questioned Libya over his detention and
trial. The new Libyan government is unwilling to comply
with the ICCs demands on the surrendering of Gaddafi
to the court, as they wish to prosecute him themselves.
On February 3, 2012, the ICC concluded: 'there is no
basis for asserting that the ICC should defer the case to
Libya... Unless Libya immediately implements Gaddafi's
rights, the ICC will report Libya to the Security Council.

This situation has furthered the ICCs inability to

prosecute Libyans perpetrators of heinous crimes
against humanity
This makes it possible to evidently conclude that the
International Criminal Court has failed to achieve its
aims in the state of Libya.

The objectives achieved in

Libya
(or lack thereof)
On many occasions the International Criminal Court (ICC) have not
achieved their main aims and objectives. There are many examples
where there have been warrants handed out that have either not
been acted upon or havent passed.
On the 16th of May 2011 The International Criminal Court
prosecutor has asked judges to issue an arrest warrant for Libyan
leader Muammar Gaddafi and two other senior members of his
embattled regime for crimes against humanity.
In response, Khaled Kaim, Libya's deputy foreign minister, said:
The ICC is not important for us. We are not part of the
Rome statute. We will not show any attention to the
decision. It seems in this case, that the power and influence
exerted by the ICC had no effect on Libya due to the fact they are
not part of the Rome Statute.

Then there are the beliefs by the Libyan leaders that it is the
international community that is at fault and should be charged
for the crimes against humanity. Mr Khaim said it was NATO
which was guilty of breaking international law by targeting Col
Gaddafi and civilians in airstrikes. This has nothing to do
with democracy, protecting civilians or implementing the
UN resolution, he said. Britain and France have been
showing no respect for civilian lives. It is blood for oil
instead of protecting civilian lives.
Also it is evident that the influence that the ICC has on a leader
like Ghadaffi is that An international arrest warrant would
however make it hard for Gaddafi to live in exile. Because the
Security Council ordered the ICC investigation, all U.N. member
states would be obliged to arrest him if he ventures into their
territory.
On the 27th of June 2011 The International Criminal Court issued
arrest warrants for Libya's Muammar Gaddafi, his son Saif al-

It is clearly evident that the

influence of the ICC is
fading.
The number one fugitive, Colonel Gaddafi, was killed
by the protestors. His politically prominent son, Saif alIslam and former head of military intelligence,
Abdullah al-Sanousi, are in custody in Libya, not
detained in The Hague. On his first trip to post-Gaddafi
Tripoli, the Prosecutor of the ICC, Luis MorenoOcampo, briefly repeated the technicalities of the
ICC's jurisdictionOnly if national courts are unwilling
or unable to prosecute international crimes, does the
ICC have jurisdiction. Moreno-Ocampo is more often
heard criticizing governments for failing to carry out
ICC arrest warrants.

The ICC's influence and power exerted in Libya was

inadequate. It owes its jurisdiction to the UN Security
Council, and can only investigate events from 15 February
2011 onwards. The extended regime crimes of Gaddafi's
four decade-long dictatorship are beyond the ICC's
responsibilities. Yet, in the eyes of everyday Libyans, the
part played by al-Islam and al-Sanousi (and indeed,
Gaddafi) in the repression of protests earlier this year is
the least of their crimes.
The ICC relies completely on the willingness of member
countries to bring these criminals to justice, yet there are
only a handful of countries that are completely obliged to
arrest those for whom the ICC issues warrants. Several
other countries have signed on, but never ratified the
treaty while still others (the United States included) have
refused to recognize the legitimacy of the ICC.

Criticisms/positives of the
action they have taken
Libyan Prime Minster Abdel Rahim el-Keeb confirmed
that they had captured Saif al-Islam, second son of
Muammar Gaddafi.
Positives
Prime Minister Abdel Rahim el-Keeb has promised a fair trial
for Saif al-Islam.
He would be treated in accordance with international law and
Libyan judicial authorities, and would communicate with the
ICC to determine the location of his trial.
They welcome cooperation with international institutions.
A spokeswoman for the ICC prosecutor said:
We are in touch with the Libyan Ministry of Justice to
ensure that any solution with regards to the arrest of Saif
al-Islam is in accordance with the law.

Criticisms/positives of the
action they have taken
Negatives
There was a lot of debate as to where he would be
tried, the ICC says that he must be tried at The Hague.
Libya wanted to trial Said al-Islam themselves, rather
than holding the trial at The Hague, which may lead to
some controversy over their intentions.
The International Criminal Court denied that they had
agreed for Saif al-Islam to be tried in Libya.
ICC & Libya continued the debate around where he
would be tried, with Libya claiming that The ICC has
accepted that Seif al-Islam will be tried in Libya by the
Libyan judiciary The trial will take place in Libya. The
Libyan justice is competent and we gave the file (on
Seif) to the ICC on Friday,

Human Rights Watch

The authorities will send an important message that theres
a new era in Libya, marked by the rule of law, by treating
Saif al-Islam humanely and surrendering him to the ICC,
said Richard Dicker international justice director at
Human Rights Watch. His fair prosecution at the ICC will
afford Libyans a chance to see justice served in a trial that
the international community stands behind.
"In any event, we call on the international community to
support Libya to fulfil its obligations either to investigate or
prosecute or to transfer Saif al-Islam to face trial before the
ICC. We urge the ICC to be ready to try Saif al-Islam
themselves, preferably in Libya, by ensuring it is ready to
establish a field presence and begin outreach to victims and
the affected communities immediately. We further call on
Libya and the international community to intensify efforts

Debate
The Following editor of this article S.R.H. Hashmi comments on
the International Community harassing the Libyan government
In a visit to Libya last November, the ICC Chief Prosecutor Luis
Moreno-Ocampo said "The standard of the ICC is that it has to be
a judicial process that is not organized to shield the suspect."
However, it is surprising that he should say that because in the
case of the biggest war criminals and mass murderers of the
century, George Bush and Tony Blair, the ICC did not show any
enthusiasm in pursuing the case, much less ask for a befitting
punishment, and that in my view does not quite establish their
credentials as great believers and enforcers of justice and hardly
justifies their loud-mouthing about their 'standard.'
Surely, this is not Luis Moreno-Ocampo but the Libyan people who
suffered violent clamp-down by Muammar Gaddafi's regime so

In response
Certainly, the ICC and the International Communities have
become suspicious and irritated by the sudden visit of the
Sudanese Ruler, especially if he and his regime are under the
scrutiny of the ICC and the International Community for
Human rights and crimes Violations against his own people.
Yes, Most of the Libyan's, the world, ICC and the International
Communities have the legitimate right to become worried,
especially when the Libyans themselves paid dearly for
liberating their own country from 45 years of thuggery and
lawlessness under the rule of the multi-nationals, Gadhafi and
Regime gangs rule.

 http://
www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzhTDWl
H5cw&feature=related
http://
www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3WfCep
_E-U