Suchergebnisse

The newly established International Criminal Court (ICC) promises justice to the victims of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Past offenders can be punished, while future potential offenders may be deterred by the prospect of punishment. Yet, justice is no substitute for intervention for the benefit of people at acute risk of being victimized. The Court may create a new moral hazard problem if the promise of ex post justice makes it easier for states to shy away from incurring the costs of intervention. This article indirectly tests for the relevance of this potential problem by estimating the determinants of ratification delay to the Rome Statute of the ICC. If the Court represents an excuse for inaction, then countries that are unwilling or unable to intervene in foreign conflicts should be among its prime supporters. Results show instead that countries that in the past have been more willing to intervene in foreign civil wars and more willing to contribute troops to multinational peacekeeping missions are more likely to have ratified the Statute (early on). This suggests that the Court is a complement to, not a substitute for intervention.

Considers (86) S. Res. 94. ; Considers S. Res. 94, to require U.S., in effect, to accept jurisdiction of International Court of Justice in legal matters involving breach of treaty or international obligations and questions of international law. ; Record is based on bibliographic data in CIS US Congressional Committee Hearings Index. Reuse except for individual research requires license from Congressional Information Service, Inc. ; Indexed in CIS US Congressional Committee Hearings Index Part VII ; Considers (86) S. Res. 94. ; Considers S. Res. 94, to require U.S., in effect, to accept jurisdiction of International Court of Justice in legal matters involving breach of treaty or international obligations and questions of international law. ; Mode of access: Internet.

On December 3rd, 1948, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted the following resolution:"Whereas the series of tragic events which have lately befallen agents of the United Nations engaged in the performance of their duties raises, with greater urgency than ever, the question of the arrangements to be made by the United Nations with a view to ensuring to its agents the fullest measure of protection in the future and ensuring that reparation be made for the injuries suffered; andWhereas it is highly desirable that the Secretary-General should be able to act without question as efficaciously as possible with a view to obtaining any reparation due; thereforeThe General Assembly

The great amount of international Courts, do not yet compose an integrated system, however reveal a part of the globalization. These courts are structures that belong to an integration or international Organization, or exceptionally they are themselves international. They range from account Auditors to Compulsory Jurisdiction, in a gender species relationship between international courts and courts of integration. Ergo their roles are in alignment with the entity's goal they belong to; an international court will have less competence than an integrational one which even act as pseudo constitutional tribunal. It shows that the source of this jurisdiction lies in a volitional face of each State; the fact of not being a supranational system is then mitigated through the figure of judicial dialogue; and these Courts can be classify under different lines of study; the more of thirty Courts of the globe that form the current international justice base the value of their contribution in avoiding war, guaranteeing essential rights, supporting democracies, unified areas, international trade, among others; an undeniable evidence of mankind evolution. ; La gran cantidad de Tribunales internacionales no llegan a ser un sistema integrado, sin embargo traslucen una sección de la globalización; generalmente ellos son estructuras de una Organización Internacional o de Integración. Los hay desde Cuentas hasta de Jurisdicción obligatoria, mostrándose una relación de género a especie entre Tribunales internacionales y de integración. Ergo sus funciones se alinean al fin de Ente base, así una Corte Internacional tendrá menos competencias que una de Integración que incluso obra como pseudo tribunal constitucional. Se aprecia que la fuente de esta jurisdicción descansa en la faz volitiva de los Estados; que el no ser un sistema integrado se atenúa tras el diálogo judicial; y que responden a una ordenación por ejes de estudio. La treintena de Cortes del globo que comportan la justicia internacional actual ponen en valor su aporte dificultando guerras, siendo garantes de los derechos esenciales, apalancando las democracias y robusteciendo zonas unificadas, entre otros; evidenciándose a la zaga un indesmentible avance para toda la humanidad. ; La gran cantidad de Tribunales internacionales no llegan a ser un sistema integrado, sin embargo traslucen una sección de la globalización; generalmente ellos son estructuras de una Organización Internacional o de Integración. Los hay desde Cuentas hasta de Jurisdicción obligatoria, mostrándose una relación de género a especie entre Tribunales internacionales y de integración. Ergo sus funciones se alinean al fin de Ente base, así una Corte Internacional tendrá menos competencias que una de Integración que incluso obra como pseudo tribunal constitucional. Se aprecia que la fuente de esta jurisdicción descansa en la faz volitiva de los Estados; que el no ser un sistema integrado se atenúa tras el diálogo judicial; y que responden a una ordenación por ejes de estudio. La treintena de Cortes del globo que comportan la justicia internacional actual ponen en valor su aporte dificultando guerras, siendo garantes de los derechos esenciales, apalancando las democracias y robusteciendo zonas unificadas, entre otros; evidenciándose a la zaga un indesmentible avance para toda la humanidad.