Striking A Balance: National Sovereignty And The International Criminal Court's Role Under The Principle Of Complementarity

Abstract

The International Criminal Court (ICC) stands as a cornerstone of international justice, holding perpetrators of the world's most serious crimes and accountability. Its role is not one of usurping national judicial systems. This abstract explores the critical principle of complementarity that underpins the ICC's mandate. Complementarity dictates that the ICC acts as a court of last resort. National courts have primary responsibility to investigate and prosecute international crimes like genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. The ICC only intervenes when states are "unable or unwilling" to genuinely pursue justice. This ensures respect for state sovereignty while addressing situations where national systems fail. The principle serves multiple purposes. It fosters national ownership of the fight against impunity, encouraging states to strengthen their judicial capacities. It promotes efficiency by allowing the ICC to focus on cases where it's uniquely needed. This study seeks to critically examine the unique feature of ‘Principle of Complementarity’ in International Criminal Court. The attempt would be to find out the need to have such principle and how it adds to the current scenario in cases of war crimes.