What is the significance of the international criminal court

Human rights defenders GlobalJustice Weekly. Israel Palestine Colombia Afghanistan. Registrar elections GlobalJustice Weekly. Victims first GlobalJustice Weekly. Mali Israel. The Philippines Syria Colombia.

Nigeria Iraq Kenya Irak Nigeria. Libya Venezuela Libia Venezuela. Colombia Serbia. Afghanistan Libya. ICC preliminary examinations update Afghanistan Venezuela Venezuela. Sri Lanka Russia Syria. Burundi Kenya. Libya Myanmar. Together for Peace Day Yemen alert Justice leaders moving on.

Preliminary examination GlobalJustice Weekly. Venezuela Colombia. Myanmar Burundi Burundi. Sexual and gender based crimes Global civil society GlobalJustice Weekly.

Deaths rise in Duterte drug war Abuses persist in Burundi. The Philippines Burundi. Mali Kenya Libya. Indigenous justice Inaction in Syria. Implementation Arrest warrant GlobalJustice Weekly. Ghana Morocco Sudan. The search for justice in Iraq and Afghanistan. Arrest warrant GlobalJustice Weekly. Israel-Palestine: 50 years and counting 15 years of impunity in CAR. Six global challenges the ICC can tackle.

EU Day Against Impunity. Sexual and gender based crimes GlobalJustice Weekly. Activists at risk as ghosts of elections past haunt Kenya. GlobalJustice Weekly - An end to genocide Colombian violence escalates. Zambia Afghanistan. Reparations GlobalJustice Weekly. GlobalJustice Weekly - Bemba et al. Implementation Victims first GlobalJustice Weekly. Conflict-driven famine looms. Gambia Australia. Nepal Syria.

GlobalJustice Weekly - Human rights report highlights justice vacuums worldwide. GlobalJustice Weekly - Deaths mount in Philippines war on drugs. Crimes against humanity GlobalJustice Weekly. The Philippines Filipinas. GlobalJustice Weekly — Syria: Civilians suffer as peace deal moves forward. GlobalJustice Weekly — Justice in sight with new Rohingya commission?

Global justice for atrocities Victims first GlobalJustice Weekly. War crimes Prosecution GlobalJustice Weekly. Cooperation Wanted GlobalJustice Weekly. Sudan Soudan. GlobalJustice Weekly — Victims sidelined in Kenya. Kenya Kenya. GlobalJustice Weekly - Burundi on the brink. GlobalJustice Weekly—Endless violence in Libya. Global justice for atrocities Preliminary examination phase two - jurisdiction GlobalJustice Weekly.

Cooperation Investigation GlobalJustice Weekly. GlobalJustice Weekly - Georgia probe on horizon? The International Criminal Court based in The Hague Netherlands was already controversial in during the diplomatic negotiations in Rome on its foundation — and has remained so until the present. Germany has been one of its most resolute supporters from the very beginning. That is also still the case today. To ensure that the worst international crimes, such as genocide, crimes against humanity , war crimes and aggression do not go unpunished — and to deter potential perpetrators.

It does not replace the work of national courts, but complements them. The ICC only takes up a case if a country is unwilling or not in a position to prosecute a criminal offence. Its jurisdiction is claimed to have worldwide validity, but currently it is still restricted in practice. It does not at the moment, because the ICC is not yet accepted by all countries.

However, countries have acceded to the Statute of the International Criminal Court — and their number will continue to grow. The ICC is still in a process of development. Staying power will be required to realise the idea of universal jurisdiction. Even 20 years is not a very long time for a visionary project like this. Because many of the 26 cases it has dealt with so far took place in Africa. However, the ICC has frequently been active in Africa because states themselves have called upon the court.

Furthermore, this impression reflects one specific point in time: meanwhile, for example, The Hague has taken up the treatment of the Rohingya in Myanmar. This is not a widespread phenomenon: Burundi, South Africa, Gambia and the Philippines have announced their withdrawal, but only Burundi had actually done so by autumn South Africa and Gambia have revised their decision.

Nevertheless, it is the case that an institution like the ICC can come under criticism in the current political climate, which is tending to give impetus to nationalist forces. In the light of its own history, the Federal Government supported the establishment of such a court for the very beginning, because it closes a gap in international justice.

The fact that today the court can not yet work as deliberately and seamlessly as had been hoped is not an argument against its existence, but a reflection of political realities. The Rome Statute extensively codifies such acts and requires the organs of the ICC to have particular expertise on violence against women and children. In fact, gender crimes were featured in the vast majority of ICC cases to date. The ICC's first verdict was issued on 14 March and the first sentence on 10 July in the Lubanga case,6 where child soldiers under the age of 15 were conscripted, enlisted and used to actively participate in hostilities in the DRC.

Charges relating to the use of child soldiers are also featured in several other ICC cases, and the Special Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict has assessed that "these indictments serve as a useful deterrent against child recruitment in situations of armed conflict". As the then United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan stated in , the ICC makes an impact by "putting would-be violators on notice that impunity is not assured [. Moreover, it can draw local as well as international attention to the situation and induce the relevant national and other stakeholders to take necessary action to defuse the crisis.

Not long ago, a minister from one of the States Parties to the Rome Statute told me that the possibility of an ICC intervention was a major factor that helped prevent large-scale violence in the context of the country's elections.

An ICC investigation may instead prompt the relevant national authorities to investigate the alleged crimes in an expeditious manner and to prosecute the suspected perpetrators in domestic courts. The ICC reduces impunity not only by punishing perpetrators, but also by allowing victims to participate in the judicial proceedings and to apply for reparations.

As of November , the ICC has received more than 12, applications for participation in the proceedings, the majority of which have been accepted. Its first decision on reparations for victims was issued on 7 August A related and innovative aspect of the Rome Statute system was the creation of the Trust Fund for Victims, which has the dual mandate of implementing court-ordered reparations as well as providing assistance to victims and their families irrespective of judicial decisions.

Currently, over 80, beneficiaries receive assistance from the Trust Fund and its local and international partners. In responding to the particular needs of victimized individuals by enabling them to regain their place within their communities and to rebuild sustainable livelihoods, the Trust Fund is becoming an increasingly visible presence on the nexus between justice and development.

The Rome Statute created not only a court, but also a new international legal system consisting of the ICC as well as the national jurisdictions of each State Party. Within this system, States have the primary responsibility to investigate and prosecute Rome Statute crimes. In his report, Mr. Annan noted that "the Court is already having an important impact by [.