It seems like political suicide right now for any American politician to even suggest we should do what so many other civilized nations have done: Sign a treaty which would subject our citizens to the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.
Why is that? What’s so horrifying about the prospect? What’s so special about Americans? Are we now an “imperial people” that can hold itself above the rules of the rest of the family of nations?
As the posters of this thread will attest
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=194825
The US constitution prohibits the ratification of any treaty that will subjugate US laws and constitution under another entity. That doesnt necesarily mean we hold our rules and laws above anyone elses, its just mean we cannot permit our laws to be superceeded by another. We can be equal but not under.
I realize that this is the Great Debate forum but In My Opinion, the ICC is irrelevant.
First of all, only the signators of the ICC are under the jurisdiction of its rulings. As Sua pointed out (in the other thread), if the ICC forces its rulings on a non-signitory then they pretty much destroyed their own reason for being which is to prevent violation of sovereignty.
Second, unless an international congress is created that will make international laws and policies that all nations agree to abide under penalty of whatever punishment this congress deems is appropriate then the ICC can really have no basis to rule upon which is the right and proper thing to do.
**Is the death penalty actionable?
**Is pre-emptory strikes against a despotic nation in full violation of UN charter considered a war crime?
**Is non-action a war crime? Which is worse, being responsible for the Holocaust or not stopping it when you had the power and opportunity to?
these things should not be left for any individual govt to decide if an International Court is going to scrutinize their actions.
And Lastly, it is highly irrelevant for a court to decide the fate of nations when there are no checks or balances for this court. Who judges the judges? Who elects these judges and what prevents their abuse or limits their power? How long can they stay as judges and who can they appeal their ruling to? It is very easy to elect a dictator into office to solve all the political problems that is currently plaguing the world. Its quite another matter to try and remove a dictator after its set in his ways.
X~Slayer(ALE), those points have been mentioned in that thread and I have said there why I believe they are all wrong. I am not going to repeat the arguments here. I invite you both to that thread as this is pretty much a duplicate.
Are all citizens of country X required to agree to abide to said country laws so those laws can be enforced?
Yep, that´s rethoric, but still I think it needs some thought.
X… I like the death penalty point… I presume you’re referring to whether enforcement of the penalty would constitute crimes against humanity?