NationStates Jolt Archive

The proposal to create an International Criminal Court is about to expire. Fewer than 30 more endorsements are required for it to come to a vote. It seems like this is something almost everybody wants! Endorse the ICC proposal before it's too late!

...pretty please?...

No. No rational leader could allow a citizen in his country to be tried for acts that, even though they may violate laws in another locale, did not violate any laws where those acts took place.

Your arguement applies only to nations wherein mass murder is legal. Nations like that should not be in the UN in the first place.

The international criminal court doesn't try all criminals. It only tries war criminals, terrorists, and those who commit crimes agains humanity (i.e. genocide). No other crimes could be tried in the ICC.

Very non-objective definitions of what constitutes a "crime". You're ahead of your subhuman leftist brethren. I'm proud of you.

Huh, I overlooked that one. Done. You need 24 more proposals.

I'd reccomend saving it as a text file to resubmit later just in case.

I have already approved your proposal. I wish I could do it again! :|

Peace,
Stephanie.

Well, everybody, the proposal failed to achieve quorum. And it came so close, too... :cry:

I will try resubmitting the proposal in a couple of weeks. Can anyone think of any changes I should make in it for the next time?

Thanks to all the delegates who supported my proposal.

Q

Catholic Europe will not support the ICC.

This is because it does not allow us to try in our own countries and under our own judiciary system.

I will try resubmitting the proposal in a couple of weeks. Can anyone think of any changes I should make in it for the next time?
May I see it again?

Do people understand how an International court is set up? As in who presides over it? That countries that are signatory to some thing like an ICC have a say in who the judges are and even have their own people as judges on the courts bench. That they rotate not unlike the UN does with non-permanent members. Who did you think would run it?

Peace,
Stephanie

The proposal to create an International Criminal Court is about to expire. Fewer than 30 more endorsements are required for it to come to a vote. It seems like this is something almost everybody wants! Endorse the ICC proposal before it's too late!

...pretty please?...

I believe the UN proposal quorum is 6% of all UN Delegates. Last I looked it hovered round 121 endorsements. This means you had some 75% of the quorum. Or, some 4,5% of all possible UN Delegate endorsements. Some ca. 1930 of the 2009 regional delegates did not endorse this.
I don't really consider that to be "almost everybody".

Do people understand how an International court is set up? As in who presides over it? That countries that are signatory to some thing like an ICC have a say in who the judges are and even have their own people as judges on the courts bench. That they rotate not unlike the UN does with non-permanent members. Who did you think would run it?

Anacanapuna's understanding:

We have concluded that the International Criminal Court does not advance these principles. Here is why:

We believe the ICC undermines the role of the United Nations Security Council in maintaining international peace and security.

We believe in checks and balances. The Rome Statute creates a prosecutorial system that is an unchecked power.

We believe that in order to be bound by a treaty, a state must be party to that treaty. The ICC asserts jurisdiction over citizens of states that have not ratified the treaty. This threatens Anacanapuna's sovereignty.

We believe that the ICC is built on a flawed foundation. These flaws leave it open for exploitation and politically motivated prosecutions.

Based on Anacanapuna's Constitution. We support the following:

Here’s what Anacanpuna believes in:

We believe in justice and the promotion of the rule of law.

We believe those who commit the most serious crimes of concern to the international community should be punished.

We believe that states, not international institutions are primarily responsible for ensuring justice in the international system.

We believe that the best way to combat these serious offenses is to build domestic judicial systems, strengthen political will and promote human freedom.


This is our position, the reasons why we take this position and decline to participate in the ICC or any form of court that wields unchecked powers.


Here is the Full Objection of one of our Allies, which also coincides with our own.

ALLIES POSITION on ICC (http://www.state.gov/p/9949.htm)

The proposal to create an International Criminal Court is about to expire. Fewer than 30 more endorsements are required for it to come to a vote. It seems like this is something almost everybody wants! Endorse the ICC proposal before it's too late!

...pretty please?...

I believe the UN proposal quorum is 6% of all UN Delegates. Last I looked it hovered round 121 endorsements. This means you had some 75% of the quorum. Or, some 4,5% of all possible UN Delegate endorsements. Some ca. 1930 of the 2009 regional delegates did not endorse this.
I don't really consider that to be "almost everybody".

I think that she means almost everybody who ever bothers to endorse proposals.

After a heated debate within our Senate, a motion to approve the International Criminal Court was shot down by a vote of 109-116, 26 votes shy of the 60% majority needed to pass a resolution within our Senate. We feel that the International Criminal Court will unfairly prosecute bureaucrats from oppressive governments after labelling them "war criminals". Recall that Field Marshal von Keitel was executed by the Nuremburg Court for accepting command of an army on the Russian front despite the fact that he personally halted the killing of thousands of innocent Jews.

In addition, we feel that a country should try people who commit a crime within its borders. In international jurisdictional disputes, an arbitration organization could be set up, but a full court is unnecessary.

Quaestor Nicholas Hayes, current Speaker of the Senate, commented for the majority through a lenghty brief on the Senate's decision.

Quaestor Gunther Kreisau,
Vice-Chair for the Office of Very Foreign Policy and UN Liaison,
Commonwealth of the Global Market