The permanent International criminal Court - the ICC - was long in planning and finally came into existence after the Yugoslavia and Rwanda Tribunals (the ICTY and the
ICTR) were seen to have had some success. However, problems facing the permanent court that involves itself in continuing conflicts have been seen to be different from those of the tribunals that deal with conflicts that had been largely concluded when the tribunals first sat. African countries whose citizens have been brought before the ICC complain of unfairness and bias
and that the ICC has become a court for Africa,
nowhere else. May they be right? Has the court
dealt evenly with different countries or has it shown itself to be
vulnerable to political influences? When the ICC becomes involved in
continuing conflicts - as it has done in Africa
- does it inevitably become involved in the politics of regime change and
even in the conflicts themselves? Does the tension between the
universal jurisdiction claimed by international criminal courts and the
immunity of heads of state from pursuit in courts help or harm when the
tension leads to some heads of state remaining in office simply to
maintain their immunity from pursuit? Sir Geoffrey Nice's involvement in the Sudan, Kenya and
Libya
cases may provide insight and indicate how a venture some think doomed
could yet be saved.
Sir Geoffrey Nice QC, Gresham Professor of Law, has
practised as a barrister since 1971. He worked at the International
Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia – the ICTY – between 1998 and 2006
and led the prosecution of Slobodan Milošević, former President of Serbia.
Much of his work since has been connected to cases before the permanent
International Criminal Court – Sudan, Kenya, Libya – or pro
bonofor
victims groups – Iran, Burma, North Korea – whose cases cannot get to any
international court. He works for several related NGO’s and lectures and
commentates in the media in various countries on international war crimes
issues. He has been a part-time judge since 1984 sitting at the Old
Bailey and has sat as judge in other jurisdictions, tribunals and
inquiries. Since 2009 he has been Vice-Chair of the Bar Standards Board,
the body that regulates barristers.
The
first five of his 2012-13 lectures asGresham Professor of Lawwill deal with issues arising from the
work of international criminal courts and tribunals. The sixth will
contrast the practice of law in international criminal courts where there is
little or no effective regulation of lawyers and judges with the present
working practices of the English Bar, on which he can reflect in light of his
long experience generally and his recent experience as a regulator.