Thread

1. guidoiaquinti · 1790685221 · focus · HN ↗

   Several International Criminal Court (ICC) judges have been unable to access their bank accounts or receive routine salary payments and financial transfers due to financial blockages triggered by United States sanctions. In the country where they live

   1. kccqzy · 1790691661 · focus · HN ↗

      The United States has never recognized the jurisprudence of ICC anyways. So to the United States these judges are just regular foreigners making decisions they don’t like. Sanctions are an appropriate tool for the United States to meddle in foreign affairs anyways. For countries that support ICC, avoiding United States is also appropriate.

      Personally I don’t really have much faith in the ICC; its premise is flawed since great powers will never be deferential to a foreign court system anyways.

      1. artnanika · 1790694337 · focus · HN ↗

         No, your premise is flawed. According to your logic, all international treaties and bodies shouldn't exist either because great powers can ignore them at will just like how they ignore the ICC. The US for instance can ignore the Geneva Conventions willy-nilly and not be punished for it since to the US government, its own laws (which allow for war crimes) will always supersede foreign treaties, does that mean the Geneva Conventions shouldn't exist?

         The ICC is a step in the right direction in the post-WW2 world, a shame though that repressive countries filled to the brim with war criminals cannot help but see it as an affront and such a threat to them.

         1. kccqzy · 1790695252 · focus · HN ↗

            No. I’m not saying all international treaties and bodies shouldn’t exist. That’s a wild misinterpretation of what I said. I said that international treaties that establish a supranational court system should not exist. The emphasis is on court system. Conflicts between countries on anything including crimes should ideally be dealt with using diplomatic means, not a court trial. That’s why the United Nations Security Council works. It’s not a court.

            1. someonebaggy · 1790695639 · focus · HN ↗

               Isn't this just another diplomatic mean? The ICC can't enforce anything, it's up to countries to care. The only difference between the ICC and the Someonebaggy Criminal Court is that the governments of places like France care slightly about what the ICC says.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.