International criminal justice versus state sovereignty: case study the international criminal court and Africa.
The objective of the study is to examine the rapid issues facing the court more so problems brought about by the very states that ratified the treaty establishing the court. To analyze this the study seeks to identify the basis of having the International Criminal Court and the criminal cases from different states before the ICC and how each case entails a lot of politics between the court, state's in question as well as other International Bodies such as the United Nations that have some "influence" over the court through the UN Security council. The study will use the theory of realism which states , that states are driven by their own interests and that international law is not law because the international system has no government and no institutions of administration on which law depends on, no legislature to make law, no executive to enforce, no judiciary to resolve disputes and develop the law. The study finds that the International Criminal Court has a role to play in ending impunity since most states are not willing to prosecute perpetrators of these crimes, the ICC may provide hope for victims of these heinous crimes, that the aspect of sovereignty is not the real issue behind African states unwillingness to cooperate but is an excuse to safeguard African leaders selfish diplomatic interests that are threatened by the court's jurisdiction, states are not willing to cooperate with the ICC and are not willing to prosecute international crimes under the Rome Statute The study further demonstrates that there is need to address the root causes of the conflict.