United States Hostility to the International Criminal Court: It’s All About the Security Council
United States Hostility to the International Criminal Court: It’s All About the Security Council
复制标题
美国对国际刑事法院的敌意：一切都与安理会有关
DOI：
10.1093/ejil/15.4.701
复制
发表时间：
2004
影响因子：
1.2
通讯作者：
W. Schabas
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
W. Schabas
现在关于美国对国际刑事法院的敌意的大量文献都反映了华盛顿提出的一连串批评，从美国国民容易受到起诉到缺乏陪审团审判等问题。但这些所谓的缺点也是美国热情支持的国际法庭的特征，从纽伦堡法庭、东京法庭到最近一代的法庭。如果国际法委员会 1994 年草案大致保持不变，今天的美国很可能会成为国际法院的热心支持者。 1994年草案与《罗马规约》最终版本之间的区别揭开了美国反对的谜团。四年起草过程中变化的核心是法院与安理会之间的关系。国际法委员会设想了一个实际上是一个常设特设法庭，完全服从于安理会并与《联合国宪章》紧密相连。但起草者调整了这一概念，结果是法院在很大程度上独立于安理会，特别是在启动起诉、推迟案件和侵略定义方面。
The now abundant literature on the hostility of the United States towards the International Criminal Court speaks to the litany of criticisms invoked by Washington, from the vulnerability of American nationals to prosecution to such issues as the lack of trial by jury. But these so-called shortcomings are also features of the international tribunals to which the United States has accorded enthusiastic support, from Nuremberg and Tokyo to the more recent generation. Had the 1994 draft of the International Law Commission remained more or less intact, it is likely that today the United States would be a keen supporter of the Court. The distinctions between the 1994 draft and the final version of the Rome Statute unlock the mystery of United States opposition. At the heart of the changes during the four-year drafting process is the relationship between the Court and Security Council. The ILC had conceived of what was in effect a permanent ad hoc tribunal, perfectly subordinate to the Security Council and interlocked with the Charter of the United Nations. But the drafters adjusted this conception, with the result that the Court has significant independence from the Security Council, notably with respect to the triggering of prosecutions, the deferral of cases and the definition of aggression.