Advice for the U.S. delegation in Kampala

Advice for the U.S. delegation in Kampala

Harold Koh’s ASIL speech drew lots of attention for his defense of the legality of U.S. use of aerial drones.  But Koh also spent much of the speech explaining and defending the U.S. decision to reorient its relationship toward the International Criminal Court.   He noted U.S. attendance (as an observer) at the ICC Assembly of States Parties in November, and U.S. plans to send a delegation to Kampala, Uganda at the end of next month for the ICC Review Conference.  That meeting will be a “big” one as the parties take stock of how the ICC has fared over its first five years of existence, and, more importantly, endeavor to fulfill the Rome Statute’s promise that the Conference will produce an agreement on a definition for the crime of aggression.  Koh’s speech painted a positive picture of U.S. engagement with the ICC in the stock-taking exercise, but sounded a more cautionary note on aggression, asking various questions on how the parties would give content to the definition and who would actually apply it in practice. 

Although it doesn’t seek to answer Koh’s questions directly, this week, UCLA’s International Justice Clinic produced a report advising the United States on how to proceed in Kampala.  The report, authored by six UCLA students, suggests that the United States should promote (and certainly not block) consensus on those elements of the crime of aggression that can be agreed in Kampala, while leaving the harder, jurisdictional issue for later negotiation.  The report expresses concern that an “all or nothing” approach by the United States on aggression might derail U.S. efforts to reengage with ICC overall.  It goes on to make additional suggestions for building U.S. cooperation with the ICC, via direct engagement with the ICC prosecutor, legislative buy-in through Congressional representation on the U.S. delegation in Kampala, and better U.S. law enforcement accountability on international criminal law issues consistent with notions of complimentarity.  Readers wanting to read the whole report can find it here.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Topics
General, International Criminal Law, National Security Law
Notify of
Benjamin Davis
Benjamin Davis

Folks who were in the ASIL panel on this precise topic will remember two points I suggested be part of the reflection being done at Kampala. 1. In the past seven years how did the international community permit the War in Iraq to occur.  This is a war Americans were lied into and as we watch the Chilcot and Dutch Commissions’ work citizens of many developed and so called civilized countries were lied into.  2.  While the US evaluates its approach to the ICC, it should be noted that Bush and Obama approaches are just two classic streams of the American approach interntaional obligations – sort of a good cop/bad cop tandem.  The question would more aptly be put as to whether the ICC should reevaluate its approach to the United States in light of the illegal War in Iraq that we started and are continued in. On slipping the jurisdiction point, the ICC supporters are right in not wanting the jurisdictional trigger to be a Security Council referrral.  All that means is that a permanent veto prevents aggressive war being addressed meaning any of the so-called guarantors of the season are permitted to not risk an aggressive war prosecution.  Looking at… Read more »