The establishment of the International Criminal Court was a singular, even revolutionary, achievement. Uniquely within the realm of international criminal justice, the ICC Prosecutor can initiate investigations independently of any state’s wishes.
Why would sovereign states agree to such sweeping powers? The Independence of the Prosecutor draws on interviews with key participants to answer that question. Case studies of Canada and the United Kingdom, which supported prosecutorial independence, and the United States and Japan, which opposed it, demonstrate that state positions depended on the values and principles of those who wielded the most power in national capitals at the time. Appendices provide a record of the arguments made by state delegations in the negotiations that produced the institutional design of the Court.
This astute investigation demonstrates that now, over twenty years after its establishment, the ICC’s innovative arrangement of having an independent prosecutor continues to move law and international criminal jurisprudence forward and directly combats impunity for mass atrocities.
Authors
- Pages
- 240
- Published in
- Canada
- Series
- Law and Society
Table of Contents
- Cover 1
- Contents 8
- Acknowledgments 9
- Introduction 14
- 1 The Story of the Independent Prosecutor for the ICC 29
- 2 The Independence of the Prosecutor 54
- 3 Canada and the United Kingdom Debate the ICC 68
- 4 The Domestic Policy Debate in the US and Japan 96
- 5 At Last, the First Permanent Court! 133
- 6 Taking Politics Seriously in the Work of the ICC 162
- Conclusion 180
- Appendix I: States in Favour of an Independent Prosecutor 190
- Appendix II: States Not in Favour of an Independent Prosecutor 193
- Appendix III: States Commenting on the First Draft of the ILC in 1994 196
- Notes 197
- References 210
- Index 222
