, PLEASE USE THIS DOCUMENT AS A GUIDE ONLY
1. Discuss the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) contribution to the enforcement of
International Law. Explain the Court’s enforcement competencies and the challenges it faces in
this regard. Provide relevant examples to support your answer.
The International Criminal Court's Contribution to the Enforcement of International Law:
Competencies, Challenges, and the Crisis of Compliance
Introduction
The establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC) through the Rome Statute in 1998
represented a watershed moment in the development of international criminal justice. For the first
time in history, a permanent international tribunal was endowed with the authority to prosecute
individuals for the most serious crimes of concern to the international community: genocide, crimes
against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. The Court's mandate, now in its
twenty-fourth year, extends beyond mere adjudication to encompass a broader ambition: the
enforcement of international law through the deterrence of atrocity crimes and the reduction of
impunity for their perpetrators (Askarisirchi 2025, p. 148).
Yet the gap between aspiration and achievement has proven substantial. Despite an annual budget
approaching €200 million and 125 States Parties, the ICC has secured convictions against only seven
individuals, while thirty-three living fugitives remain at large, including heads of state and
government (Coalition for the International Criminal Court 2025). This paradox—a court vested with
immense normative authority but limited coercive power—lies at the heart of any assessment of the
ICC's contribution to international law enforcement. As one observer has aptly characterised it, the
ICC resembles "a faulty firework that had been expected to spectacularly light up the sky of
international justice" but has instead produced "just enough smoke, heat and fizzle to make things
interesting" (Johari 2026).
This analysis examines the ICC's enforcement competencies as established under the Rome Statute,
evaluates the Court's actual contribution to international law enforcement through the principle of
complementarity and its deterrent effects, and critically assesses the structural and political
challenges that constrain its effectiveness. Through examination of relevant cases—including the
Al-Bashir prosecution, the Netanyahu warrant, and recent non-compliance by Hungary, Mongolia,
and Italy—this discussion demonstrates that while the ICC has made meaningful contributions to the
normative architecture of international law, its enforcement capacity remains fundamentally
dependent on state cooperation, a dependency that increasingly threatens the viability of the
international criminal justice project.
1. Discuss the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) contribution to the enforcement of
International Law. Explain the Court’s enforcement competencies and the challenges it faces in
this regard. Provide relevant examples to support your answer.
The International Criminal Court's Contribution to the Enforcement of International Law:
Competencies, Challenges, and the Crisis of Compliance
Introduction
The establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC) through the Rome Statute in 1998
represented a watershed moment in the development of international criminal justice. For the first
time in history, a permanent international tribunal was endowed with the authority to prosecute
individuals for the most serious crimes of concern to the international community: genocide, crimes
against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. The Court's mandate, now in its
twenty-fourth year, extends beyond mere adjudication to encompass a broader ambition: the
enforcement of international law through the deterrence of atrocity crimes and the reduction of
impunity for their perpetrators (Askarisirchi 2025, p. 148).
Yet the gap between aspiration and achievement has proven substantial. Despite an annual budget
approaching €200 million and 125 States Parties, the ICC has secured convictions against only seven
individuals, while thirty-three living fugitives remain at large, including heads of state and
government (Coalition for the International Criminal Court 2025). This paradox—a court vested with
immense normative authority but limited coercive power—lies at the heart of any assessment of the
ICC's contribution to international law enforcement. As one observer has aptly characterised it, the
ICC resembles "a faulty firework that had been expected to spectacularly light up the sky of
international justice" but has instead produced "just enough smoke, heat and fizzle to make things
interesting" (Johari 2026).
This analysis examines the ICC's enforcement competencies as established under the Rome Statute,
evaluates the Court's actual contribution to international law enforcement through the principle of
complementarity and its deterrent effects, and critically assesses the structural and political
challenges that constrain its effectiveness. Through examination of relevant cases—including the
Al-Bashir prosecution, the Netanyahu warrant, and recent non-compliance by Hungary, Mongolia,
and Italy—this discussion demonstrates that while the ICC has made meaningful contributions to the
normative architecture of international law, its enforcement capacity remains fundamentally
dependent on state cooperation, a dependency that increasingly threatens the viability of the
international criminal justice project.
