Spring 2012 (26.1) • Essay

Introduction

The ICC is the product of gradual normative changes in world politics since World War II. Since the founding of the United Nations, traditional practices of sovereign immunity have been challenged by a principle of individual criminal liability for the worst violations of morality and international legal prohibitions. War crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, and even aggression (which may be subject to the ICC’s jurisdiction within the decade) are now viewed as universal and unequivocal wrongs, and no guilty individual—whether acting in an official capacity or not—is excused by appeals to particularistic goods, such as national security or in-group solidarity, or by such exigencies as suppressing revolution or terrorism, or fighting an unjust government. With nearly 120 states parties, the 1998 Rome Statute consolidates a significant normative shift in world politics.

To read or purchase the full text of this article, click here.

More in this issue

Spring 2012 (26.1) • Review

Morality and War: Can War Be Just in the Twenty-First Century? by David Fisher

Morality and War is a timely addition to contemporary just war literature. While advocating the use of just war principles to evaluate modern armed conflict, ...

Spring 2012 (26.1) • Essay

Why the International Criminal Court Must Pretend to Ignore Politics

While pretending that political factors are irrelevant may appear dishonest, and therefore unethical, forcing the court to pretend to rely on exclusively legal reasons for ...

Spring 2012 (26.1) • Essay

Local Priorities, Universal Priorities, and Enabling Harm