Efficiency Lecture Question
In what ways could the ICC’s bureaucracy, finances, judicial election process, and relationship with the States Parties be reformed to increase its efficiency as an instrument for international justice?
Comment on the Efficiency Lecture Question: “In what ways could the ICC’s bureaucracy, finances, judicial election process, and relationship with the States Parties be reformed to increase its efficiency as an instrument for international justice?”
I agree with the above poster's comments and think that the ideas for reform are insightful. However, I do not know if I agree with the statement "compromise could taint the reputation of the ICC because politics cannot be connected to pure justice." While it is arguable that in very special cases, politics cannot be connected with pure justice, to generalize this for all cases implies a more skeptical view on politics than I have. As I mentioned in discussion, I think that evolving the relationship with the signatories of the Rome statute - and thus involving political bodies and therefore, politics etc... - is necessary in order to create a court that is an instrument of international justice. To me it seems inherently more democratic, which I guess I am assuming is more just/positive, to involve the parties that are subject to the court in the management of the court.
M. Cherif Bassiouni
Professor of Law
Comment on the Efficiency Lecture Question: “In what ways could the ICC’s bureaucracy, finances, judicial election process, and relationship with the States Parties be reformed to increase its efficiency as an instrument for international justice?”
I agree with the above poster's comments and think that the ideas for reform are insightful. However, I do not know if I agree with the statement "compromise could taint the reputation of the ICC because politics cannot be connected to pure justice." While it is arguable that in very special cases, politics cannot be connected with pure justice, to generalize this for all cases implies a more skeptical view on politics than I have. As I mentioned in discussion, I think that evolving the relationship with the signatories of the Rome statute - and thus involving political bodies and therefore, politics etc... - is necessary in order to create a court that is an instrument of international justice. To me it seems inherently more democratic, which I guess I am assuming is more just/positive, to involve the parties that are subject to the court in the management of the court.