Europe and the United States, and in-between the International Criminal Court (ICC)


Cover of the book Europe and the United States, and in-between the International Criminal Court (ICC) by Richard Fuchs, GRIN Publishing
View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart
Author: Richard Fuchs ISBN: 9783638178839
Publisher: GRIN Publishing Publication: March 26, 2003
Imprint: GRIN Publishing Language: English
Author: Richard Fuchs
ISBN: 9783638178839
Publisher: GRIN Publishing
Publication: March 26, 2003
Imprint: GRIN Publishing
Language: English

Seminar paper from the year 2003 in the subject Politics - International Politics - Topic: Public International Law and Human Rights, grade: 1,0 (A), Western Michigan University (Department of Political Science), 33 entries in the bibliography, language: English, abstract: [...] The paper attempts to make this transatlantic conflict more transparent through a comparative analysis of U.S. and EU responses to the ICC. It provides historical knowledge about the ICC development from an unsettled idea to its final implementation, and it clarifies American and European National Interests behind the scenes. Within the analysis, American objections will be outlined and set in context with the European counter-arguments. The most controversial issues between the transatlantic partners including the prosecutorial powers, the question of immunity, the risk of politically motivated prosecutions as well as the rights of the accused in trial procedures will be at the heart of the debate. The paper works with the hypothesis that the ICC case constitutes a transatlantic clash of ideologies centering on a fundamentally different interpretation of national sovereignty. Whereas the European Union considers the ICC as an expansion of its national sovereignty and its sphere of influence, the U.S. views the same issue as an infringement of its Constitutional Rights (Macpherson & Kaufman, 2002, p. 220). Whereas the EU is in fear of a possible 'double standard' in International Human Rights Law, the U.S opposes 'automatism' in ICC jurisdiction as a result of its universality. For the EU, a 'double standard' in International Human Rights Law would occur, if American citizen were granted immunity without specification of time and conditions. For the US, the rejected 'automatism' is the Court's right to step in and take over a case under ICC jurisdiction if a trial is not preceded after the Rome Statute 'Rules of Procedure'. For the purpose of our research, the paper will start with the definition of State Sovereignty of Langley, which defines the multifaceted term as 'a fundamental concept of international law, defining the supreme authority of each state to make and enforce laws with respect to all property, events, institutions and persons within its borders' (Langley, 1999). I conclude that that we indeed can see in the ICC case study urgent evidence for an ideological gap between the EU and the US, because the main arguments on both sides can all be traced back to the underlying question, how national sovereignty is defined under the current Rome Statute, so that we have to redefine the above mentioned definition for the US, respectively for the EU.

View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart

Seminar paper from the year 2003 in the subject Politics - International Politics - Topic: Public International Law and Human Rights, grade: 1,0 (A), Western Michigan University (Department of Political Science), 33 entries in the bibliography, language: English, abstract: [...] The paper attempts to make this transatlantic conflict more transparent through a comparative analysis of U.S. and EU responses to the ICC. It provides historical knowledge about the ICC development from an unsettled idea to its final implementation, and it clarifies American and European National Interests behind the scenes. Within the analysis, American objections will be outlined and set in context with the European counter-arguments. The most controversial issues between the transatlantic partners including the prosecutorial powers, the question of immunity, the risk of politically motivated prosecutions as well as the rights of the accused in trial procedures will be at the heart of the debate. The paper works with the hypothesis that the ICC case constitutes a transatlantic clash of ideologies centering on a fundamentally different interpretation of national sovereignty. Whereas the European Union considers the ICC as an expansion of its national sovereignty and its sphere of influence, the U.S. views the same issue as an infringement of its Constitutional Rights (Macpherson & Kaufman, 2002, p. 220). Whereas the EU is in fear of a possible 'double standard' in International Human Rights Law, the U.S opposes 'automatism' in ICC jurisdiction as a result of its universality. For the EU, a 'double standard' in International Human Rights Law would occur, if American citizen were granted immunity without specification of time and conditions. For the US, the rejected 'automatism' is the Court's right to step in and take over a case under ICC jurisdiction if a trial is not preceded after the Rome Statute 'Rules of Procedure'. For the purpose of our research, the paper will start with the definition of State Sovereignty of Langley, which defines the multifaceted term as 'a fundamental concept of international law, defining the supreme authority of each state to make and enforce laws with respect to all property, events, institutions and persons within its borders' (Langley, 1999). I conclude that that we indeed can see in the ICC case study urgent evidence for an ideological gap between the EU and the US, because the main arguments on both sides can all be traced back to the underlying question, how national sovereignty is defined under the current Rome Statute, so that we have to redefine the above mentioned definition for the US, respectively for the EU.

More books from GRIN Publishing

Cover of the book The Welfare Regime Debate and Health Care Provision by Richard Fuchs
Cover of the book A Dead Narrator in Charles Higson's Getting Rid of Mister Kitchen by Richard Fuchs
Cover of the book Digital Signal Processing using the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) by Richard Fuchs
Cover of the book Foreign Policy of the United States by Richard Fuchs
Cover of the book Employment Law In the Automotive Dealership by Richard Fuchs
Cover of the book Seeking roots of discrimination by Richard Fuchs
Cover of the book Analysis of Toshio Mori 'The Chessmen' by Richard Fuchs
Cover of the book Sales Psychology, Negotiation and Persuasion by Richard Fuchs
Cover of the book Il Tragico nella teoria estetica di Schiller by Richard Fuchs
Cover of the book International harmonization of accounting by Richard Fuchs
Cover of the book Determiners and Quantifiers - Differences by Richard Fuchs
Cover of the book Theories on the origin of the english progressive by Richard Fuchs
Cover of the book Electronic Discourse in educational Moos by Richard Fuchs
Cover of the book Reflective Writing by Richard Fuchs
Cover of the book A Contrastive Analysis of the English and the German Sound System by Richard Fuchs
We use our own "cookies" and third party cookies to improve services and to see statistical information. By using this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy