Which is better? ICC or ICJ? Why? Or Why Not?
The question of whether the International Criminal Court (ICC) or the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is better is subjective and depends on one's perspective and the specific criteria being considered.
1. Jurisdiction and Purpose: The ICC primarily deals with prosecuting individuals for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. It aims to hold individuals accountable for their actions and promote peace and justice. On the other hand, the ICJ is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations and settles legal disputes between states. Its focus is on resolving disputes related to international law.
2. Impact and Functionality: The ICC has been successful in conducting investigations and trials related to serious international crimes, making it an important institution for the global fight against impunity. However, it faces challenges like limited jurisdiction, reliance on state cooperation, and resistance from powerful states. The ICJ, although unable to enforce its decisions, plays a role in resolving disputes between nations and contributes to the development of international law through its decisions.
3. Accessibility and Universality: The ICC has faced criticism for mainly prosecuting individuals from African countries, which has led to accusations of bias and selectivity. However, its jurisdiction is designed to be universal, and efforts are being made to ensure broader participation from all countries. The ICJ's accessibility is limited as only states can bring cases before it, and not all states have consented to its jurisdiction.
Ultimately, it is challenging to definitively determine which court is better, as their roles and functions differ significantly. It is more appropriate to acknowledge the positive aspects and contributions they make to international law and justice, while also recognizing the limitations and challenges each court faces.