Who's Above The Law? An Inquiry into the International Criminal Court's Entrenchment Of Global Racial Hierarchies and Permission Of Evasion

The International Criminal Court (ICC) was founded as a response to the atrocities committed in the late 20th century, notably the genocides in Yugoslavia and Rwanda, which exposed the limitations of ad hoc tribunals. The Court' s establishment was celebrated by states across the globe for its purpose of holding crimes against humanity accountable. Despites its celebrated origins, up until the International Criminal Court' s twenty-second year, the body had only prosecuted African individuals. This fact has led state leaders and scholars to question and allege the court is a post-colonial tool for W estern nations to control and monitor African states, while permitting evasion of Global North actors and their allies for similar crimes. T o investigate this claim, existing scholarly works have overlooked the drafting history of the Rome Statute, the founding treaty of the International Criminal Court, thus omitting an important primary source to support claims on how and why the Court is hegemonic. Through examining the Plenary Meetings of the Rome Conference (1998), this thesis identifies how hierarchies of race and power were entrenched into the Statute by omitting demands for fairness by Global South nations and coalitions and how the addition of Articles 12, 98, and 124 laid the groundwork for evasion by Global North states and their allies. This thesis supports the validity of critiques that racial inequity rooted in post-colonial structures and hegemony have marred the Court functions of indiscriminately defending the right to peace and security for all.