Richard Dicker
Director, International Justice Program, Human Rights Watch
Lecture Topic beginning January 15, 2013
UN Security Council Lecture Question
How should the relationship between the International Criminal Court and the United Nations Security Council be changed, if at all, to advance international justice?
Comment on the Security Council Lecture Question: “How should the relationship between the International Criminal Court and the United Nations Security Council be changed, if at all, to advance international justice?”
As fraught as the relationship is between the UNSC and the ICC, new and dynamic strategies should be pursued to mend and amend the relationship. As ideal as having all the members of the UNSC be party to the Rome Statute, it is not politically feasible in the short-term. Since a UNSC referral to the ICC requires unanimous consent, the ICC should pursue and lobby for new ways to change this dynamic. Perhaps in place of unanimity, the bar for referral should be lowered to a 2/3 majority. This would allow countries to voice their concern/objection while still allowing justice to be better served (as in the case of Syria, where alleged war crimes have been committed). Additionally, there should be more binding force behind ICC arrest warrants that charges the UN and its member states with arrest of suspects (or even Interpol). As politically charged as such an action would be, this is one of the few avenues for providing the added force and legitimacy of the court while further addressing the challenge in apprehending suspects that the ICC currently faces. I assume these bold changes would require a modification to the Rome Statute, which may open up a pandora's box of other issues, but it is only with such changes to its legal framework that the ICC will be able to better serve justice. If those party to the Rome Statute truly believe in a system of international justice, they should help bolster its ability to pursue its mission and minimize the opportunities to politicize its work.
Richard Dicker
Director, International Justice Program, Human Rights Watch
Comment on the Security Council Lecture Question: “How should the relationship between the International Criminal Court and the United Nations Security Council be changed, if at all, to advance international justice?”
As fraught as the relationship is between the UNSC and the ICC, new and dynamic strategies should be pursued to mend and amend the relationship. As ideal as having all the members of the UNSC be party to the Rome Statute, it is not politically feasible in the short-term. Since a UNSC referral to the ICC requires unanimous consent, the ICC should pursue and lobby for new ways to change this dynamic. Perhaps in place of unanimity, the bar for referral should be lowered to a 2/3 majority. This would allow countries to voice their concern/objection while still allowing justice to be better served (as in the case of Syria, where alleged war crimes have been committed). Additionally, there should be more binding force behind ICC arrest warrants that charges the UN and its member states with arrest of suspects (or even Interpol). As politically charged as such an action would be, this is one of the few avenues for providing the added force and legitimacy of the court while further addressing the challenge in apprehending suspects that the ICC currently faces. I assume these bold changes would require a modification to the Rome Statute, which may open up a pandora's box of other issues, but it is only with such changes to its legal framework that the ICC will be able to better serve justice. If those party to the Rome Statute truly believe in a system of international justice, they should help bolster its ability to pursue its mission and minimize the opportunities to politicize its work.