INTERNATIONAL CRIME COURT
Author: Sibani Suresh, student of Symbiosis Law School
INTRODUCTION
Genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and crimes of aggression are among the most serious crimes that the international community is concerned about. The International Criminal Court (ICC) investigates these cases and, where necessary, brings cases against those accused. It aims to supplement national courts rather than to replace them as a court of last resort.
It is evident that, particularly in developed and emerging nations, the frequency of global crimes has significantly increased since the late 90’s. The sheer bluntness, brazenness, and boldness of some crimes have caused law enforcement authorities to consider different containment and prevention tactics. It wouldn’t be incorrect to argue that the rapid pace of globalization and the rise in e-commerce have contributed to increased crime and criminal systems.
Additionally, as communications and telecommunications systems are updated and brought to the cutting edge, criminal networks benefit greatly from more accessible access to international geographic zones, a higher level of safety and confidentiality, and the ability to deceive law enforcement agencies for brief periods.
The modern internet’s relative transparency and agility have also proved advantageous to crime syndicates, enabling them to carry out malicious tasks with lethal accuracy and speed.
ANALYSIS
The United Nations:
The leading body addressing international crimes and potential containment and elimination strategies is the United Nations. The International Court of Justice operates under the auspices of the United Nations and is tasked with enforcing justice against states rather than people.
To combat crime and restore peace and order in countries that have suffered from it, it is evident that international criminal law organisations collaborate closely with local governments and organisations. They also build networks and contacts with agencies and counterparts around the globe. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) are the primary agencies in the US’s network for combating crime. It is vital to take into account how their services support the upkeep of international criminal law and global peace order.
Federal Beauru of Investigation:
Their goals are to prevent terrorists and transnational threats from endangering foreign interests, to strictly enforce criminal justice theories, and to provide leadership in local, state, and federal settings in collaboration with agencies and partners.
The FBI offers the opportunity to take on a variety of professional challenges, particularly in the wake of 9/11. The FBI’s efforts to combat international crimes include a global component as well.
Some rules and conventions must be viewed from the perspective of an international community. These could be viewed in terms of the regulations established by the UN organisations to protect human rights in nations where such rights have been violated or are currently being abused.
It could also be interpreted in terms of the guidelines and rulings of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) or other capable international legal organisations. However, given that these courts are transnational organisations that deal with nations or States rather than people, it is evident that they are typically only able to issue recommendations rather than verdicts.
Therefore, the type of rulings the ICJ could provide against States or other nations could restrict the scope of the court. Nonetheless, it is evident in the current environment that the International Criminal Court was founded to assist people in upholding their civil and human rights. When cases like these are sent to the ICC for arbitration or settlement, the ICC also witnesses abuses or violations of human rights.
Any nation may have rules governing crime and how it is dealt with, and states may enforce these laws to ensure the welfare and peace of their population. But when it comes to foreign and transnational crimes, it must occasionally give in and take into account the rules of other nations.
This could specifically relate to transnational offences, crimes committed by residents outside the borders of their country of origin, crimes carried out by foreign nationals inside the state, and other issues involving the laws and regulations of multiple nations. It is evident that negotiating extradition accords with other countries may help the home nation deal with accused criminals sought in their home nations.
INTERNATIONAL COURTS
To uphold Justice in legal matters emerging in an international environment is required. When a crime is committed in one nation’s global seas, that nation, which has territorial rights over the waters in that specific zone or the country closest to the crime scene, can pursue legal action against the perpetrator.
Nonetheless, to govern the law of the sea, a unique collection of laws about maritime behaviour is required, rather than depending solely on the rulings and decisions of the International Court of Justice, which have a broader scope. The author believes that a dedicated fund would be better equipped to handle the intricate details of the law of the seas.
Even with the International Criminal Courts, one may argue that only nations are susceptible to ICC rulings; individuals do not profit from such decisions. Consequently, it was evident that people would rather settle their differences among themselves or through the services of arbitrators, mediators, or both. The ICC’s scope is quite limited because its services would only be required in cases involving state conflicts.
To make the usage of these courts more significant and helpful for individual applications and justice seekers, forums that can handle specific issues and attempt to settle them must be formed. An international tribunal may be created to handle these kinds of cases permanently since the mandate of these tribunals is broad enough to cover serious individual situations.
It is suggested that a significant facet of international law concerning the operation of the International Criminal Court should be considered. A global legal authority that could potentially bring justice to the victims of terrorist attacks and incite punitive systems is desperately needed in the context of ever-increasing violence, particularly that of a terrorist nature. This body would also be necessary to strongly discourage and oppose terrorism in its various forms.
The ability of individual governments to enact legislation that could allow for the punishment of international crimes is the primary factor in the execution of international laws in the context of the ICJ or ICC. States must therefore have a functional legal system that is proactive and has all the required legislation in place.
Cost-effectiveness and whether justice has been served must be considered when addressing international criminality. The ICC has not been very successful in holding those responsible for genocide as well as other violations of human rights to account. It should be noted that the incapacity of the regional legal system to provide adequate justice prompted many to look for outside legal counsel. Additionally, this is done to prevent any local influences that can taint and distort the case—particularly if the accused has the power to influence the proceedings in a way that might impede the administration of justice.
Since the statutes of international jurisdiction must be affirmed and recognized by the nations; it is frequently claimed that these laws must be stronger. Furthermore, it is questionable if international courts should have the authority to meddle in domestic matters unless there are international crimes that are universally denounced, such as genocide, terrorism, or flagrant human rights abuses that draw attention from around the world. Legislators undoubtedly have a global perspective, but they also need to consider individual or collective cases with an international influence.
CONCLUSION
Given the possibility that less serious offenders could get disproportionately severe penalties while more experienced offenders will escape prosecution, policing international criminal laws presents a difficult and pressing task. The complexities of this matter are found in extradition procedures, especially in cases where accused criminals live abroad in nations with different legal systems. Complicating things, the enforcement of international laws is made more difficult by the differences in criminal laws among nations, including those inside the European Union.
Different legal systems handle foreign crimes differently; some consider them to be municipal crimes, while others may require legislative changes to bring them into compliance with international norms. There is no universal mechanism in place to implement recommendations made by entities such as the International Criminal Court (ICC) or the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Instead, the execution of these recommendations is left up to the decisions made by individual governments. International crimes are also frequently independently investigated by local agencies, which emphasises the necessity of having specialised organisations handle these cases.
International legal action is necessary, yet the political environment and attitudes of the host countries affect how effective international law enforcement can be. It is essential to maintain vigilance at borders, entry and exit ports, and vital installations to foil criminal actions aimed at causing fear and panic. To promote a sense of sanctity and safety in society, nations must understand how important it is to coordinate their enforcement of international laws with UN directives, ICJ decisions, Rome Statutes, and other pertinent legal frameworks.
Going forward, there is increasing agreement that foreign policing needs to be more efficient and properly supervised. Youth unhappiness and disillusionment are exacerbated by societal issues such as population increase, inflation, rising living expenses, socioeconomic inequities, and prohibitive education fees. Economic hardship and unemployment, for example, might put young people at risk of being recruited by terrorists and encourage criminal activity motivated more by desperation than by philosophy.
It is crucial to address the underlying reasons for criminal behaviour, highlighting the need for rehabilitation and reintegration of offenders into society. It is imperative to impart human values to those who have deviated from the road of lawfulness, assisting them in becoming contributing members of society. The focus needs to be on creating a society that is peaceful and places its citizens’ welfare above crime and violence.
Social change is necessary to create a decriminalised, safer, and more secure environment. Legislators and politicians are essential to enacting significant changes that are advantageous to all facets of society. Crime and its effects will continue until significant changes are made, which emphasises how crucial it is to address society’s problems to successfully reduce criminal activity.
