American reluctance to join the International Criminal Court illuminates important trends in international security and a central dilemma facing U.S. Foreign policy in the 21st century. The ICC will prosecute individuals who commit egregious international human rights violations such as genocide. The Court is a logical culmination of the global trends toward expanding human rights and creating international institutions. The U.S., which fostered these trends because they served American national interests, initially championed the creation of an ICC. The Court fundamentally represents the triumph of American values in the international arena. Yet the United States now opposes the ICC for fear of constraints upon America's ability to use force to protect its national interests. The principal national security and constitutional objections to the Court, which the volume explores in detail, inflate the potential risks inherent in joining the ICC. More fundamentally, they reflect a belief in American exceptionalism that is unsustainable in today's world. Court opponents also underestimate the growing salience of international norms and institutions in addressing emerging threats to U.S. national interests. The misguided assessments that buttress opposition to the ICC threaten to undermine American leadership and security in the 21st century more gravely than could any international institution.

This book theorizes the ways in which states that are presumed to be weaker in the international system use the International Criminal Court (ICC) to advance their security and political interests. Ultimately, it contends that African states have managed to instrumentally and strategically use the international justice system to their advantage, a theoretical framework that challenges the “justice cascade” argument. The empirical work of this study focuses on four major themes around the intersection of power, states' interests, and the global governance of atrocity crimes: firstly, the strategic use of self-referrals to the ICC; secondly, complementarity between national and the international justice system; thirdly, the limits of state cooperation with international courts; and finally the use of international courts in domestic political conflicts. This book is valuable to students, scholars, and researchers who are interested in international relations, international criminal justice, peace and conflict studies, human rights, and African politics.

The International Criminal Court remains a sensitive issue in U.S. foreign policy circles. It was agreed to at the tail end of the Clinton administration, but with serious reservations. In 2002 the Bush administration ceremoniously reversed course and "unsigned" the Rome Statute that had established the Court. But recent developments in Washington and elsewhere indicate that the United States may be moving toward de facto acceptance of the Court and active cooperation in its mission. In Means to an End, Lee Feinstein and Tod Lindberg reassess the relationship of the United States and the ICC, as well as American policy toward international justice more broadly. Praise for the hardcover edition of Means to an End "Books of this sort are all too rare. Two experienced policy intellectuals, one liberal, one conservative, have come together to find common ground on a controversial foreign policy issue.... The book is short, but it goes a long way toward clearing the ideological air." — Foreign Affairs "A well-researched and timely contribution to the debate over America's proper relationship to the International Criminal Court. Rigorous in its arguments and humane in its conclusions, the volume is an indispensable guide for scholars and policymakers alike." —Madeleine K. Albright, former U.S. Secretary of State "Two of our nation's leading authorities on preventing atrocities have joined to make a convincing argument that closer cooperation with the International Criminal Court will help promote human rights and the values on which America was founded." —Angelina Jolie, co-chair, Jolie-Pitt Foundation

The International Criminal Court has significantly grown in importance and impact over the decade of its existence. This book assesses its impact, providing a comprehensive overview of its practice. It shows how the Court has contributed to major developments in international criminal law, and identifies the ways in which it is in need of reform.

This book aims to investigate whether, and if so, how, an institution designed to bring to justice perpetrators of the most heinous crimes can be regarded a tool of oppression in a (neo-)colonial sense. To do so, it re-invents the concept of neo-colonialism, which is traditionally associated more with economic or political implications, from an international criminal law perspective, combining historical, political and legal analyses. Allegations of neo-colonialism in relation to the International Criminal Court (ICC) became widespread after the Court had issued an arrest warrant against the Sudanese President Omar Al-Bashir in 2009. While the Court, since its entry into function in 2002, has been confronted with criticism from various corners, the neo-colonialism controversy was sparked by African stakeholders. Unlike other contributions in this domain, thus, this book provides a Western perspective on an issue more often addressed from an African standpoint, with the intention of distinguishing itself from the more political and emotive and sometimes superficial arguments that exist within critical legal approaches towards the ICC. The subject matter will primarily be of interest to scholars of international criminal law or those operating at the intersection of law and politics/history, nationals of African states and from other parts of the world professionally interested and/or involved in international criminal law and justice and the ICC, and governmental and non-governmental organizations. Secondly, the book will also appeal and speak to critical legal scholars and those interested in historical legal analysis. Res Schuerch is a Swiss lawyer specialized in the field of International Criminal Law and the ICC. He previously worked as a researcher at the University of Amsterdam and as an academic assistant at the University of Zürich.

Professor Sadat's book is a valuable "restatement" of international criminal law, discovering and delineating the process that led the United Nations from Nuremberg to the Rome Statute of an International Criminal Court. "With the establishment of the International Criminal Court we enter an exciting era in the development of internatonal criminal law. This well written and thoroughly researched work provides a comprehensive and insightful analysis and critique of the Rome Statute and the impact of prosecuting war criminals" -- Justice Richard Goldstone Published under the Transnational Publishers imprint.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) is the first permanent international criminal tribunal, which has jurisdiction over the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole: genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and crime of aggression. This book critically analyses the law and practice of the ICC and its contribution to the development of international criminal law and policy. The book focuses on the key procedural and substantive challenges faced by the ICC since its establishment. The critical analysis of the normative framework aims to elaborate ways in which the Court may resolve difficulties, which prevent it from reaching its declared objectives in particularly complex situations. Contributors to the book include leading experts in international criminal justice, and cover a range of topics including, inter alia, terrorism, modes of liability, ne bis in idem, victims reparations, the evidentiary threshold for the confirmation of charges, and sentencing. The book also considers the relationship between the ICC and States, and explores the impact that the new regime of international criminal justice has had on countries where the most serious crimes have been committed. In drawing together these discussions, the book provides a significant contribution in assessing how the ICC’s practice could be refined or improved in future cases. The book will be of great use and interest to international criminal law and public international law.

A universal criminal court : the emergence of an idea -- The global civil society campaign -- The victory : the independent prosecutor -- The defeat : no universal jurisdiction -- The controversy : gender and forced pregnancy -- The missed chance : banning weapons -- A global civil society achievement : why rejoice?

This book analyzes the position of the ICC in relation to national court systems. The research illustrates that what seemed to be a straight forward relationship between the ICC and national courts under the complementarity mechanism, proves to be much more complex in practice. Using the referrals of Uganda and Darfur, the book demonstrates ways in which it might be possible to prosecute for crimes currently not prosecuted by the ICC and brings to light possible solutions to overcome the gaps in law and practice in the jurisdictional relation between the ICC and national systems. It will be of value to academics, students and policy-makers working in the area of international law, international organizations, and human rights.