Rome Statute

The Rome Statute is the international treaty that established the International Criminal Court (ICC), a permanent judicial institution empowered to prosecute individuals for the gravest offences of concern to the international community—genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. Adopted on 17 July 1998 in Rome, Italy, the Statute represents a milestone in the development of international criminal law, setting the legal foundation for accountability, justice, and the prevention of impunity for mass atrocities.

Background and Origins

The idea of an international criminal court traces back to the aftermath of World War I, but it was the unprecedented atrocities of World War II—including the Holocaust—that catalysed the first international war crimes tribunals: the Nuremberg and Tokyo Tribunals (1945–1948). These ad hoc courts laid the groundwork for defining crimes under international law and the principle of individual criminal responsibility.
In subsequent decades, various efforts to establish a permanent court failed due to Cold War divisions and differing national interests. However, the 1990s revival of international criminal justice, marked by the establishment of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in 1993 and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) in 1994, demonstrated the feasibility of such mechanisms and renewed momentum for a permanent institution.
The United Nations General Assembly tasked the International Law Commission (ILC) with drafting a statute for a permanent international criminal court. After years of negotiation, a Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries was convened in Rome from 15 June to 17 July 1998, attended by representatives from 160 countries. The resulting Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court was adopted with 120 votes in favour, 7 against, and 21 abstentions.

Entry into Force and Structure of the ICC

The Rome Statute entered into force on 1 July 2002, following the sixtieth ratification, as required by its terms. The ICC is headquartered in The Hague, Netherlands, and operates as an independent international organisation distinct from the United Nations, though it maintains a close working relationship under a cooperation agreement.
The Court is composed of four main organs:

• The Presidency: Responsible for overall administration and representation of the Court.
• The Judicial Divisions: Comprising the Pre-Trial, Trial, and Appeals Chambers, with judges elected by the Assembly of States Parties (ASP).
• The Office of the Prosecutor (OTP): Conducts investigations and prosecutions; led by the Prosecutor, who acts independently.
• The Registry: Provides administrative, legal, and logistical support to the Court’s operations.

The Court’s official working languages are English and French, and proceedings adhere to principles of fairness, due process, and transparency.

Jurisdiction and Admissibility

The Rome Statute defines the jurisdiction of the ICC in three key respects: subject matter, territorial or personal scope, and temporal scope.

1. Subject Matter Jurisdiction: The ICC may prosecute only four core crimes:
   • Genocide – Acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group.
   • Crimes against humanity – Widespread or systematic attacks directed against civilians, including murder, enslavement, torture, rape, enforced disappearance, and apartheid.
   • War crimes – Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and other serious violations of the laws of armed conflict.
   • Crime of aggression – The planning or execution of acts of aggression by one state against another, added through the Kampala Amendments (2010).
2. Territorial and Personal Jurisdiction: The ICC can exercise jurisdiction when:
   • The alleged crime occurred on the territory of a State Party, or
   • The accused is a national of a State Party, or
   • The situation is referred by the UN Security Council, even if the state concerned is not a party.
3. Temporal Jurisdiction: The Court has jurisdiction only over crimes committed after 1 July 2002, the date the Statute entered into force.

Additionally, the principle of complementarity governs the ICC’s relationship with national jurisdictions. This means the Court acts only when states are unwilling or unable genuinely to investigate or prosecute crimes themselves.

States Parties and Non-Party States

As of the mid-2020s, 123 countries are States Parties to the Rome Statute, spanning all continents. Key supporters include most European, Latin American, and African nations. However, several major powers—including the United States, China, Russia, and India—are not parties to the Statute.
The United States initially signed the Statute in 2000 but later withdrew its signature, citing concerns about sovereignty and potential politically motivated prosecutions of its nationals. Similarly, China and Russia objected to the Court’s jurisdictional reach and the potential for interference in domestic matters.
Despite these absences, the ICC continues to function as the central pillar of international criminal accountability, often cooperating with regional and ad hoc tribunals.

Procedures and Functioning

The ICC may initiate proceedings in three ways:

1. State Party Referral: A member state refers a situation to the Prosecutor.
2. UN Security Council Referral: The Security Council refers a situation under Chapter VII of the UN Charter.
3. Proprio Motu Action: The Prosecutor opens an investigation on their own initiative, subject to judicial authorisation.

The legal process includes preliminary examinations, formal investigations, issuance of arrest warrants or summonses, trial proceedings, and appeals. The Court adheres strictly to international standards of criminal procedure, protecting the rights of both victims and accused persons.
Victims play an unprecedented role in ICC proceedings—they can participate directly in trials and receive reparations through the Trust Fund for Victims, an innovation not seen in earlier international tribunals.

Major Cases and Precedents

Since its establishment, the ICC has dealt with cases involving alleged crimes in Africa, the Middle East, Europe, and Asia. Prominent examples include:

• Thomas Lubanga Dyilo (Democratic Republic of the Congo): The ICC’s first conviction (2012) for conscripting child soldiers.
• Omar al-Bashir (Sudan): The first sitting head of state indicted by the ICC for genocide and crimes against humanity in Darfur.
• Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto (Kenya): Accused of post-election violence; cases later collapsed due to insufficient evidence and witness intimidation.
• Joseph Kony and the Lord’s Resistance Army (Uganda): Arrest warrants issued for crimes against humanity.
• Vladimir Putin (Russia): Subject to an arrest warrant (2023) for alleged unlawful deportation of children from occupied territories of Ukraine.

These cases illustrate both the Court’s ambition and the political challenges it faces in enforcing justice across sovereign boundaries.

Criticism and Controversies

Despite its groundbreaking role, the ICC has faced significant criticism:

• Perceived bias: The Court has been accused of disproportionately targeting African leaders. Critics note that most of its early investigations were Africa-centred, though several were referred voluntarily by African states themselves.
• Political interference: Some nations argue the Court has been used to serve Western geopolitical interests.
• Enforcement limitations: The ICC lacks its own police force and relies on state cooperation to execute arrest warrants, often resulting in impunity when states refuse compliance.
• Withdrawal of members: Countries such as Burundi (2017) and the Philippines (2019) have withdrawn from the Statute in protest of ongoing investigations.
• Jurisdictional disputes: Questions persist regarding the ICC’s authority over non-member states and conflict zones with contested sovereignty.

Nonetheless, supporters argue that the ICC’s existence acts as a deterrent and symbol of global commitment to ending impunity for atrocity crimes.

Significance and Legacy

The Rome Statute signifies a paradigm shift in international law—from the sovereignty of states as absolute to the recognition of individual criminal accountability under international jurisdiction. It embodies the principle that certain crimes are so heinous that they concern humanity as a whole, transcending national boundaries.
The Statute has contributed to:

• The codification of international criminal law.
• The promotion of human rights and transitional justice.
• The strengthening of global norms against impunity.
• The empowerment of victims in international legal processes.

The Future of the Rome Statute System

As the world becomes increasingly multipolar and fragmented, the Rome Statute faces challenges of political legitimacy, funding, and jurisdictional reach. Expanding universal ratification remains a major goal, alongside enhancing cooperation mechanisms and improving efficiency in investigations.