The Netherlands Is Dismantling the International Criminal Court
rightsforum.org
rightsforum.org
Edit: only took one hour - it's even within the editing window for this comment!
What's next after ICC, start of slavery?
https://www.hrw.org/news/2002/08/03/us-hague-invasion-act-be...
This is done just to please some foreign pals.
> a) granting immunity to heads of state;
> b) excluding the Court's jurisdiction over nationals of non-state parties, even when they commit crimes on the territory of a state party; and
> c) denying the Court's jurisdiction over cases covered by national legislation.
Basically, no skin in the game for the decision makers, a will to power for the foot soldiers, and a panopticon for everyone else.
This may be a hard sell as 2/3rds majority is required to bring any Rome Statue amends into force.
International bodies are incredibly useful, but only if they avoid being used as political tools. And lately they've been delivering failure after failure. ICC, UN, WHO...
The correct solution in Israel was always UN troops. But that'd involve UN getting their hands dirty and doing something other than giving resolutions.
The title is wrong. Negotiating to do something is not the same as doing the thing.
Would you listen someone if they come to your house and start claiming it? Would you negotiate with them?
Dismantling ICC is taking something from all of us.
Like, is Europe just completely fucking asleep? You can play China and US off against each other, then the US will think twice when their supposed allies run to their enemies.
You can't win a battle when you have 20 generals and require the force of 20 in the way, when each has its own agenda and incentives and some of them are easy to buy