> Based on the precedent at nuremburg, an international body can setup a tribunal to punish those crimes even against the will of the state in question. You d

> Based on the precedent at nuremburg, an international body can setup a tribunal to punish those crimes even against the will of the state in question. You do realize the precedent at Nuremberg (note the spelling), requires that the the capitulation of the party being tried? Famously, at the trial of admiral Dönitz, the defense presented an affidavit from admiral Chester Nimitz, where he confessed to the same crimes Dönitz was being tried for. Dönitz was convicted, but the court declined to try Nimitz because the United States was on the winning side and thus outside of the jurisdiction of the court. You can't impose a tribunal on a country, without capitulation.