Originally published on the CGS blog on July 17, 2013.
Today being International Justice Day, I wanted to write a post about the International Criminal Court, but in light of the closure of the George Zimmerman trial, I feel that this piece wouldn’t be complete without relating the issue of international justice to our own issues of domestic justice.
I am not alone in my disappointment in and sadness of the outcome of the Zimmerman trial. I believe that it demonstrates that the U.S. justice system is flawed, despite its centuries-long evolution and opportunity to reform. That said, public displeasure is a clear signal that our country believes in the principle of justice and wants to see it enforced.
Unfortunately, public interest is often too narrowly focused on domestic issues. However, this does not reduce the importance of ensuring justice for all peoples. Thankfully, the International Criminal Court (ICC) was established just over a decade ago in order to administer justice for the world’s gravest crimes, such as genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes.
Although this international institution is young, it has already achieved some success. On March 14, 2012, the Court made its first ever conviction: Thomas Lubanga of the Democratic Republic of the Congo was convicted of war crimes – namely, enlisting and conscripting children under the age of 15 – and was sentenced to 14 years in prison. Another victory for the ICC occurred on March 18 of this year when Bosco Ntaganda of the DRC turned himself in to the Court in order to face charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity. He currently awaits trial.
Despite these successes, the ICC is certainly not a perfect institution. Presently, there are 8 fugitives that have been indicted by the ICC, including Omar Al Bashir of Sudan and Joseph Kony of Uganda. Many states of the African Union refuse to cooperate with the Court, accusing it of complicating peace efforts in the region and of unfairly targeting Africans. Furthermore, the ICC still can’t get jurisdiction over the atrocities in Syria because Russia and China have vetoed the Security Council’s referral of the situation to the ICC.
As these examples demonstrate, the ICC has its own flaws and still needs to be strengthened, but this does not mean that the U.S. should not participate in the proceedings of the Court. In fact, the way to improve institutions is to engage in them. Domestically, even Americans who are disappointed in the Zimmerman verdict are not disengaging from the judicial system, but rather they are appealing to it, calling on the U.S. Justice Department to open a civil rights case against George Zimmerman.
But for a nation that demands justice at home, it is time that we also demand justice abroad. Currently, domestic law prevents the U.S. from directly supporting the ICC, and it only permits limited cooperation with the Court. In order for justice to be achieved at an international level, these laws need to change, and the U.S. must show leadership in efforts to engage in the ICC and to strengthen it.
I think that today we should celebrate International Justice Day not only in recognition of the achievements of the ICC but also in hopes that the future of U.S. engagement with the Court is not too far down the road.
