Carnegie Council

Shopping Cart

People Topics

Text Size: A A

Print this Page Email this Page Bookmark and Share

Compromising Justice: Why the Bush Administration and the NGOs Are Both Wrong about the ICC [Abstract]

Ethics & International Affairs, Volume 20.1 (Spring 2006)

Kenneth A. Rodman

April 24, 2006

The critics of the ICC in the Bush administration and its supporters within the human rights community have one thing in common: they assume that the ICC can evolve into a powerful institution independent of states, either to constrain American power or to act on a duty to prosecute to end impunity for perpetrators. Both overestimate the ability of the court to pursue a legalism divorced from power realities. The former attribute to the court powers it is unlikely to exercise, particularly if the United States remains outside the treaty. This is due, in part, to the safeguards within the Rome Statute, but more importantly, to the court’s dependence on sovereign cooperation, which will lead it to place a high premium on cultivating the good will of the most powerful states. The latter overestimate the degree to which courts by themselves can deter atrocities. The ICC’s effectiveness in any particular case will therefore be dependent on the political consensus of those actors capable of wielding power in that area. They also underestimate the need to compromise justice—at least, prosecutorial justice—in cases in which bargaining and compromise are the central means of facilitating transitions from armed conflict or dictatorship, and in cases in which the strength of the perpetrators and the limits of one’s power would make legal proceedings either futile or counterproductive to other interests and values. Hence, decisions to prosecute must first be subjected to a test of political prudence, and then take place according to due process and the rule of law.

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

Read More: Justice, Transitional Justice, Human RightsInternational Criminal Court ,



blog comments powered by Disqus

About the Journal

The Carnegie Council's flagship publication, Ethics & International Affairs is an interdisciplinary resource for scholars, students, and policy analysts concerned with the moral dimensions of global issues. The journal covers global justice, civil society, democratization, international law, intervention, sanctions, and related topics.

Search the Journal

ETHICS & INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
25TH ANNIVERSARY

25 year anniversary EIA celebrates 25 years, 1987-2011


Sign up for the EIA Journal Newsletter

SUBSCRIPTIONS
To subscribe to Ethics & International Affairs, or to purchase individual issues and articles, please contact Cambridge University Press.

CALL FOR PAPERS
We are currently accepting submissions for upcoming issues of the journal. For more information, click here.

SUBMISSION GUIDELINES
For submission guidelines, click here.

RESPONSES
The Editors welcome responses to Features and Essays published in Ethics & International Affairs. To be considered for publication, responses should be no longer than one thousand words, including endnotes (which should be kept to a minimum). Responses are not peer-reviewed, and are published at the Editors' discretion. All responses are subject to editing for length and style. In the event of any questions or substantive editing, the response will be returned to the author for final approval prior to publication. Responses are published online, alongside the article they address.

Features

Policy Innovations Online Magazine

The central address for a fairer globalization.
> More

Ethics & International Affairs

Go to the Journal for articles on ethics and foreign policy.
> More

postprandial-ft