International Criminal Court Case Study

The United Nations aims to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war” (UN Charter) by promoting international peace and security. Founded in 1945, the UN had 51 member states. Today there are 193 member states, yet the system remains unchanged. While disputes are tangible and concrete, conflicts are processes in which actors express dissatisfaction or disagreement with organizational structure (Constantino & Merchant 5). The intangibility of conflict makes it difficult to diagnose. Furthermore, resolutions to address the organizational structure will often leave parties dissatisfied. For these reasons, UN reform is challenging to execute. The UN has not improved its structure, lingering in a primarily Quadrant I system. The Security Council are the power figures in the organization, controlling the questions and deciding the answers (Constantino & Merchant 57). Their veto privilege and power to decide over matters that threaten international security have bolstered influence in the world system. In theory, the permanent five (P5) members of the Security Council are the most powerful in the international system, with the ability to veto any action they deem incompatible with their interests. The five permanent members and ten semi-permanent members are tasked with ensuring international peace and security. In reality, “a majority of states within the General Assembly want to abolish or curtail the right of the veto” (Weiss & Young 140). Member states may even denounce the system’s structure, leading to organizational disputes. The P5 will discover that while they have maintained their seats, they have lost their legitimacy. After World War II, the greatest powers of the world order maintained legitimate seats on the Security Council. Since 1945, the world order has changed dramatically, requiring a change in the United Nations system. In 1945, five of 51 member states were permanent members. The United Nations should introduce five new permanent seats available to member states who satisfy the criteria. The original five plus five new permanent seats will total ten permanent members (P10) of 193 member states. Population and GDP will be the criteria to fill the seats. India, Brazil, Nigeria, Japan and Germany will join the US, the UK, the Russian Federation, China and France as permanent members. Population is a criterion for the representation of vast amounts of people. GDP as a criterion is to ensure a moderate economic health in the potential member. Introducing five new permanent members engenders a change in the cultural, linguistic and religious composition of the Security Council. Conflicts involve a variety of stakeholders. In international conflicts, a variety of states have vested interests in the survival, security and health of other states. I propose electing these stakeholders prior to collaborating for a resolution. Therefore, “elected” seats will replace semi-permanent seats. In the conflict resolution process, each state vying for a greater voice may apply to become an elected member for that specific issue. A state can apply to become a stakeholder for a number of economic, political and diplomatic reasons; however, states must denounce terrorism before the application process begins. Each state will present their case to the ten permanent members who will vote to approve their status. A four-fifths vote is required for approval. The P10 will not have authority to veto the approval of a stakeholder. …show more content…
The International Criminal Court (ICC) also executes investigations in cases involving war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity. This presents a structural dilemma as both the UN and the ICC investigate matters of international crime. These activities overlap, “creating conflict, wasted effort, and unintended redundancy” (Bolman & Deal 71). Furthermore, these activities generate information for their respective organizations that may not be shared with the other organization. Among conflicts featuring international crime, the two international organizations must cooperate to efficiently gather information. The ICC, an international tribunal, overlaps with the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the principal judicial organ of the UN. An alliance is necessary to allocate judicial powers between the organizations. For investigations featuring war crimes, genocide and crime against humanity, the two intergovernmental organizations will collaborate to deter overlap. Through restructuring a cooperation between the organizations, the ICC and the UN can achieve mutual political benefits (Roach