The Problems Facing the International Criminal Court: African Perspectives
Abstract
Since the establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC), it has faced serious problems and has been subject to criticism, particularly from African states. More specifically, some African states have argued that the operation of the Court has produced outcomes that are vastly different from what was imagined and hoped for at the time the Court was negotiated in 1998. The dissertation answers four interrelated research questions: (1) What kind of International Criminal Court (ICC) did African states want prior to and during the Rome Diplomatic Conference in 1998? (2) Why did African states ratify the Rome Statute more than any other region even though they did not get the kind of Court that they wanted? (3) What are the origins of the criticisms levied by African states against the ICC? (4) Why, despite the compromises reached in Rome, and the significant criticism levied against the resultant ICC since, would African states commit and/or stay committed to the Court by signing, ratifying, and implementing the Rome Statute into domestic law more than any other region? The dissertation employs constructivist international relations theory and makes the overall argument that the active and meaningful engagement on the part of African governments and African individuals in the Rome Statute/ICC project from its earliest stages of development has created a deep normative commitment to the resultant Court, which, at times, overrides rationality and self-interest explanations of state behaviour.