Incidents and involution risks at the International Criminal Court

Abstract

In October 2016, three African countries belonging to the Rome Statute informed of their complaint, thus their withdrawal from the International Criminal Court. The decision of the complainants was grounded in the alleged partiality of the Court, depending on whether, with the exception of one, all cases resolved or under investigation pertain to countries of the African continent. In this sense, the core objective of this article consists of analyzing the causes having been offi cially argued by these three States for them to withdraw, as cross-checked with the facts deemed to have motivated their determination, and examining the questionings and hostilities received by the court from other members of the international community. It has been concluded that their eventual withdrawal, although it entails a signifi cant blow to its credibility and is creating setbacks in its consolidation as well as involution risks, it does not endanger the Court’s
viability, while the most serious challenge lies in attacks from other countries not involved in it. The method used in this article offers a brief review of some aspects of the jurisdictional work of the Court in its fourteen years of life that have given origin to the most recurrent targets for critics.