3 ms·

Not knowing anything about the subject, I'm not so sure. Eg if someone's actions or gross negligence causes, say, a big oil spill and the ICC wants to try them

Not knowing anything about the subject, I'm not so sure. Eg if someone's actions or gross negligence causes, say, a big oil spill and the ICC wants to try them, won't that pretty much remove that person's ability to travel to any country that recognizes the ICC? Assuming they'd primarily target businesspeople (eg BP CEO etc), wouldn't act as a pretty decent deterrent?

dj_mc_merlin 6y ago
The article mentions the ICC would prosecute heads of state. The American Service Members' Protection Act[0] authorizes the president to us "any and all means" to rescue a government official that is tried by a foreign court. It was specifically written with the ICC in mind. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Pr...
- Daho0n 6y ago
  That shouldn't hold them back. Let the US throw the first stone.
gruez 6y ago
How legal is it to hold a trial without the accused present?
- michaelt 6y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_in_absentia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_in_absentia The defendant has the right, but not the obligation to be present. If they're informed of the trial but don't show up or send a representative, the trial can go ahead anyway. It would be difficult to try minor crimes (like traffic court) if not turning up to court meant you couldn't be punished.
  - gruez 6y ago
    >The defendant has the right, but not the obligation to be present. If they're informed of the trial but don't show up or send a representative, the trial can go ahead anyway. According to the wikipedia article, it's not as simple as that. It's allowed in some european states but not others. In the US it's disallowed with a variety of exceptions, none of which include "accused was too hard to apprehend". >It would be difficult to try minor crimes (like traffic court) if not turning up to court meant you couldn't be punished. AFAIK those are civil offenses, not criminal offenses, so you don't get many of the due process protections.
- Quanttek 6y ago
  The ICC is not allowed to hold trials in absentia. It would wait for a State party to take the accused into custody and transfer them to the ICC

dj_mc_merlin 6y ago

The article mentions the ICC would prosecute heads of state. The American Service Members' Protection Act[0] authorizes the president to us "any and all means" to rescue a government official that is tried by a foreign court. It was specifically written with the ICC in mind. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Pr...

Daho0n 6y ago
That shouldn't hold them back. Let the US throw the first stone.

gruez 6y ago

How legal is it to hold a trial without the accused present?

michaelt 6y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_in_absentia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_in_absentia The defendant has the right, but not the obligation to be present. If they're informed of the trial but don't show up or send a representative, the trial can go ahead anyway. It would be difficult to try minor crimes (like traffic court) if not turning up to court meant you couldn't be punished.
- gruez 6y ago
  >The defendant has the right, but not the obligation to be present. If they're informed of the trial but don't show up or send a representative, the trial can go ahead anyway. According to the wikipedia article, it's not as simple as that. It's allowed in some european states but not others. In the US it's disallowed with a variety of exceptions, none of which include "accused was too hard to apprehend". >It would be difficult to try minor crimes (like traffic court) if not turning up to court meant you couldn't be punished. AFAIK those are civil offenses, not criminal offenses, so you don't get many of the due process protections.
Quanttek 6y ago
The ICC is not allowed to hold trials in absentia. It would wait for a State party to take the accused into custody and transfer them to the ICC