THE IMPERATIVES OF INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNALS AND INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT ON CRIME OF GENOCIDE
The idea of a strong standing tribunal to try serious violations of international law has been around since the end of World War II. After WWII, the Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals were set of ad-hoc by the Allies, the victors of the World War II to try the principals of the loosing axis power. While the Nuremberg was regarded as more successful and significant than the Tokyo tribunal. During the years of the cold war, the idea of the future of International Criminal Court largely occupied the back burner of the International affairs. With the fall of the Soviet Union in the early 1990’s various tribunal and international conflicts broke out in the world. Most notably, after the break-up of former Yugoslavia and the modern Balkan wars, it was clear war crime, genocide and crimes against humanity were occurring on a mass scale. Similarly, tribal warfare between the Hutus and Tutsis in several African countries including Rwanda and Burundi lead to enormous human right abuses. The United Nations Security Council established ad-hoc tribunals to address the international crimes arising from those crises, the tribunals were set up specifically for the propose of those local conflicts, they revived the interest in the need to established a permanent global criminal court. And in 1998, the Rome statute was drafted, which set forth the legal frame work for a standing tribunal to address war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity, this was achieved in April 2002. The ICC formally come in existence on July 1st, 2002. The coalition of countries and civil society organisations in more 150 countries work in partnership to strengthen international corporation with the ICC, ensure that the court is fair, effective and independent; make justice both visible and universal. An advanced strong national laws, that deliver justice to victims of war crimes, genocides and crimes against humanity. The provision of the Rome statute do not instill enough confidence to preclude the possibility.