ICC and International Humanitarian Law Research Paper by johnnyoutsmart

ICC and International Humanitarian Law
A look at why the U.S. voted against the text of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
# 58225 | 12,752 words | 84 sources | MLA | 2004 | GB
Published on May 03, 2005 in Law (International) , Political Science (General)


$19.95 Buy and instantly download this paper now

Description:

This paper begins with a discussion of the U.S.A. arguments against its opposition to the International Criminal Court. This is then followed by a brief history of Article 16, beginning with the Article 23(3) of the International Law Commission Draft and ending with the final amendments that led to the adoption of Article 16 in its present form. The paper then provides a legal analysis of the conditions stipulated under Article 16 in conjunction with the conditions set forth in Article 39 of the United Nations Charter. It further examines the consistency of Resolution 1422 with both Article 16 and Article 39 of the UN Charter. The consequent section considers the conformity of the Resolution 1422 with the UN purposes and principles, arguing that there are inconsistencies, which have legal ramifications. The subsequent section commences arguing that the Security Council had exceeded its competence by adopting Resolution 1422. It further discusses the impact of the aforesaid resolution on two main points of the law of treaties. Finally, the paper addresses the impact of Resolution 1422 on different aspects of international law.

Outline
The U.S.A. and the Rome Statute
The Drafting History of Article 16
Resolution 1422 and Article 16
Resolution 1422 and the Purposes and Principles of the UN
Resolution 1422 and the Law of Treaties
Flying in the Face of International Law

From the Paper:

"After the Rome Conference, the USA proclaimed that it wouldn't sign or ratify in present or in future the treaty in its present form . "Some U.S. officials have suggested that U.S. policy may go beyond mere non-participation to 'actively opposing' the ICC." After returning from the Diplomatic Conference in Rome, Meron Stated that, "[t]here is a real possibility that the United States may become actively hostile to the [Rome Statute] treaty." Senator Rod Grams who chaired the first Congressional hearing to review the ICC stated, "[t]his Court truly is a monster, and it is a monster that must be slain," . What are the reasons for a democratic country to become 'actively hostile' to such a treaty? Illustrating the stiffness and the rigidity of the USA position regarding the ICC treaty during the Rome Conference, it has been argued that, at the Rome Conference the USA delegation, "baked by its world's preeminent power," was so rigid to reach compromises that "some delegates began to wonder if the United States was really 'negotiating' at all, and many began to contemplate the possibility of proceeding without U.S. support."

Cite this Research Paper:

APA Format

ICC and International Humanitarian Law (2005, May 03) Retrieved August 14, 2022, from https://www.academon.com/research-paper/icc-and-international-humanitarian-law-58225/

MLA Format

"ICC and International Humanitarian Law" 03 May 2005. Web. 14 August. 2022. <https://www.academon.com/research-paper/icc-and-international-humanitarian-law-58225/>

Comments