An analysis of state cooperation and enforcement of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) by the International Criminal Court in non-state parties in Africa.

Abstract

Impunity continues unabated within the international system despite dedicated measures aimed at punishing the offenders. Since the Nuremberg Military post WWII, dedicated initiatives to guarantee international peace and security via implementing punitive measures against those who commit egregious deeds against humanity have been implemented. The Rwandan and Yugoslavian genocides, and subsequent tribunals instituted afterwards quickly come to the fore. These two tribunals set the tone that resulted in the establishment of the International Criminal Court under the Rome Statute. Since formation, the body has been accused of inherent bias against the African continent. This thesis sought to establish the veracity of that assertion through establishing cooperation between African non state parties and the Rome Statute. Documentary research formed the key thrust of this thesis. Theories of humanitarian intervention such as the fiduciary theory and views of the classical scholar, Grotius, were used and related to the objectives. Models of criminal justice that sought to understand basis of punishment were also used and an evaluation of the ICC strategy as it relates to Africa evaluated. The conclusion being that the strategy is not in sync with aspirations of the continent and as such the ICC must ensure the concerns of African states are address to guarantee cooperation. The other alternative choice existing for African states being to exit from the obligations of the Rome Statute and form a new all African Court to punish Africans for crime committed in Africa