International court necessary

On April 22, the International Criminal Court is expected to get the ratifications necessary to go into effect. This would eliminate the need for ad hoc military tribunals like the kind where Milosevic is currently being prosecuted. The ICC will allow for a more efficient way to prosecute war crimes and will ensure that future war criminals are punished. The ICC is needed to facilitate America's war on terrorism and create a more efficient international judicial system. \nThe ICC will be an organization capable of prosecuting serious violators of human rights. In accordance with international human rights standards, the maximum penalty that will be given will be life imprisonment. The ICC will only work in conjunction with the suspect's nation. Therefore, the ICC will only prosecute when the suspect's nation does not.\nThe ICC has 139 signatures and 56 ratifications. Once the ICC gets 60 ratifications, the court goes into effect. It is expected that four ratifications will come within the next month. But the Bush administration has been hinting that it is going to "unsign" the treaty. This means the Bush administration will contact the UN and say that America has no intention of ever ratifying the treaty and wishes to be released from all obligations associated with its original signing. This "unsigning" is unprecedented and will create backlash within the European community. \nBush's resistance to the ICC comes at a time when the ICC is going to be needed the most. Bush's continued war on terrorism may result in the apprehension of many war criminals and violators of humanitarian rights. If the ICC is up and running, these war criminals will most likely be prosecuted in the ICC. This will allow for a much more fair trial than the military tribunals the Bush administration is creating in the U.S. Also, since the death penalty cannot be issued by the ICC, international support of the war on terrorism will be higher because the death penalty is looked upon unfavorably overseas. By supporting the ICC, America will receive more support for its war on terrorism and will be allowed to defend itself with the support of Europe and other ICC supporting areas. \nThe ICC will also allow suspected human rights violators to be prosecuted more quickly and easily. War tribunals like the prosecution of Milosevic were established to prosecute actions only in certain areas during certain times. These tribunals take an extensive amount of effort and time to create. With the creation of the ICC, a venue for prosecuting these suspected human rights violators will already be in place. This will result in a more efficient international judicial system. \nAnother objection of the U.S. to the ICC is the risk of U.S. soldiers fighting abroad being brought before the court on false charges. This risk is limited. The ICC will only try cases where someone has systematically committed human rights abuses. This effectively eliminates a trial because of an isolated incident by a rogue American soldier, whether true or not. Also, the UN security council, of which the U.S. is a permanent member, has an extensive amount of power over the ICC. America should support the ICC because it will facilitate the U.S.'s fight against terrorism and because it creates a more efficient international judicial system.