Pyrrhic Victory for the ICC in Kampala

Brett Schaefer / June 15, 2010

Going into the Review Conference of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in Kampala, Uganda, it was clear that the highest priority on the American agenda was to defeat an amendment that would grant the ICC jurisdiction over the crime of aggression. At the very least, the U.S. wanted to convince the delegates (America is not a party to the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the ICC, and thus did not have a vote at the conference) to grant the court jurisdiction over aggression only in cases where the U.N. Security Council has determined that an act of aggression has been committed.

In the end, the U.S. failed in its main objectives. But the U.S. was able to address many of its concerns during conference negotiations. While the U.S. played a minimal role in this, Article 124 was maintained, which is in the U.S. interest. The Belgian amendment was adopted, creating an unfortunate precedent for expanding the list of weapons whose use are considered war crimes under the Rome Statute, but the risks to the U.S. were largely negated. On the vital question of aggression, the success of the U.S. and similarly concerned states in placing checks on the court’s ability to exercise jurisdiction over aggression in significant ways should be recognized as a hard-fought, albeit less than ideal, achievement. (more…)