At Stardate 20030624.2056, Jan Coffey wrote:
Personaly I see the ICC as a step twards European federalization. I think that is a good thing for Europe, but not for the States. It's too much too fast. Let Europe federalize first and learn what the difficulties of such a system are.
IIRC, that's not going to happen: the EU recently decided NOT to federalise.
Only problem is that I can't find a link to a news article about it. Martin, could you throw in your excellent talents at URL-finding for this?
What you will learn is that federal chriminal law is a very fragile creature. The only reason that our system works is becouse we have seperate bodies of governemnt. Legislative making the laws, Executive inforcing the laws, and Judicial judging the law in practice.
That cannot be the reason. The Netherlands is not a federal country, but we do have those exact same three separate branches: Legislative, Executive and Judicial. Works just fine.
For the general average American to be satisfied with the ICC we would have to have a simmilar system with 3 equaly powerful branches.
Impossible: those three branches apply to a *country*, but the ICC is not a country but a Court of Justice. The ICC cannot have those three branches, as it would be *part* of one of those branches (Judicial).
Further we would have to have equal (by population not by state) democratic control over who manned the positions of such a governement.
Why would you want to have that particular form of control over the ICC, when you don't even have that same particular form of control over your own government?
Jeroen van Baardwijk
_________________________________________________________________________ Wonderful-World-of-Brin-L Website: http://www.Brin-L.com
[Sponsored by:] _____________________________________________________________________________ The newest lyrics on the Net!
http://lyrics.astraweb.com
Click NOW!
