Is The International Criminal Court (ICC) Effective Or Structurally Powerless?
Arjav Jauhar, Modern School, Vasant Vihar
ABSTRACT
More than two decades after its creation, the International Criminal Court (ICC) remains a source of both hope and frustration in the quest for global accountability. Born from the 1998 Rome Statute, the Court was meant to prosecute the gravest crimes—genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and aggression—when national systems fail. Yet its dependence on state cooperation, limited jurisdiction, and the non-participation of major powers raise a persistent question: is the ICC structurally hobbled from the start, or has it managed to build real influence despite these flaws? This paper examines the Court’s design, enforcement struggles, complementarity principle, and evolving practice, with special attention to India’s longstanding reservations. Drawing on recent cases from Mali, Ukraine, Afghanistan, and elsewhere, it argues that the ICC occupies an imperfect middle ground—normatively significant but practically constrained. For non-party states like India, the experience offers valuable lessons about sovereignty, domestic justice, and the limits of international institutions in a multipolar world.
