Argument: ACC could deal with pan-African problems that the ICC does not address

It has been suggested that offences such as “unconstitutional change of government”, drug trafficking, piracy and corruption [1] should be added to the jurisdiction of an African Criminal Court.

The ICC is limited to only a small number of crimes. However, an African Criminal Court could not only deal with the existing crimes, but create pan-African solutions in terms of dealing with a number of issues where Africa needs particular solutions.

An ACC could deal with piracy off the coast of East Africa, where there is no effective court system, due to Somalia amounting to a failed state. Similarly, “unconstitutional change of government” prosecutions could amount to a deterrent to coups.

[1] IRIN, “Analysis: How Close is an African Criminal Court?”, IRIN (Integrated Regional Information Networks), 13 June 2012, http://www.irinnews.org/report/95633/analysis-how-close-is-an-african-cr...

Candidate 1: "Peace is cheaper than war – however much a court case costs, in both human lives and money, it is better for there to be a trial.

Even if it is more expensive, justice is priceless – it is not something that can be subjected to cost-benefit analyses or bean counting.

The reason why Western countries fund the ICC is not some form of imperialism – simply a desire for global peace, justice and security so they would likely be willing to keep paying much of the cost."
Candidate 2: "If it is a damp squib, so be it – other international organizations have fallen in to disuse – UN institutions that only exist on paper such as the Trusteeship Council are not doing any harm and there would be the fallback of returning to the ICC if things go wrong."
Candidate 3: "There isn’t such a balancing act – without justice there cannot be peace as it is simply likely to lead to attempts at retribution or vigilante justice. Justice is a universal value, an end in itself. It is not something that can be given away as a bargaining chip."
Candidate 4: "An African Criminal Court instead of African ICC membership would not lead to impunity – just more local courts. The principle of complementarity, allowing national courts to take appropriate action – is already enshrined in the ICC. In a particularly bad case, the UN Security Council could still refer a situation to the ICC.

Running an African Criminal Court in tandem with the ICC would allow another layer of regional justice to bring the Nuremberg precedent – leaders held criminally responsible for criminal actions – in to fruition in Africa."
Candidate 5: "African states have been happy with the ICC in the past – they referred ICC cases to the court themselves.

If African states were to set up their own court, it would be unclear how it would work with the existing framework of the ICC as some African states may wish to remain ICC members. Also, a regional body would still lead to allegations of a “foreign court”, while at the same time placing the decisions in the hands of judges who may be less insulated from regional geopolitical pressures."
Candidate 6: "Drugs trafficking was considered as a role for the ICC, but rejected as unworkable – an ACC would face the same problems. “Unconstitutonal change of government” would be open to rampant political abuse, allowing existing governments to cling on to power.

No other supranational regional body has tried having its own prosecution system or criminal courts – not even the European Union. Regional bodies can – and should – have courts to deal with treaty interpretation or human rights treaties, but regional criminal courts are a major step into the unknown. Criminal cases are best served by one nation, or all of them – not a regional bloc with its own tensions."
Candidate 7: "Almost all of the cases where people have been indicted before the ICC – DR Congo, Uganda, Central African Republic and the Ivory Coast – have been referred to the court by African nations themselves. Those that have not were referred to the UN Security Council. The only case where the Office of the Prosecutor started a case leading to incitement was the Kenya case, Kenya having signed and ratified the Rome Statute. The ICC can only act where it has jurisdiction [1] - it is not a kangaroo court for particular cases.

The ICC has looked in to cases outside Africa, including in Afghanistan, Honduras, the Mediterranean sea (an Israeli attack on Comorosian, Greek and Cambodian ships), Korea, Colombia, Georgia and Palestine [2] .

[1] Rome Statute, Article 22

[2] Office of the Prosecutor, Report in to Preliminary Examination Activities, 2013, http://www.icc-cpi.int/en_menus/icc/press%20and%20media/press%20releases..."
Candidate 8: "By being a court for the African continent by the African continent, there will not be room for allegations of imperialism and/or racism that already exist against the International Criminal Court.

In addition, the African states that are members of the International Criminal Court have chosen to do so – it is not a violation of state sovereignty for a state to voluntarily sign a treaty even if that treaty restricts the actions of future governments."

Drugs trafficking was considered as a role for the ICC, but rejected as unworkable – an ACC would face the same problems. “Unconstitutonal change of government” would be open to rampant political abuse, allowing existing governments to cling on to power.

No other supranational regional body has tried having its own prosecution system or criminal courts – not even the European Union. Regional bodies can – and should – have courts to deal with treaty interpretation or human rights treaties, but regional criminal courts are a major step into the unknown. Criminal cases are best served by one nation, or all of them – not a regional bloc with its own tensions.
