On Legal Issues Of US Sanctions Against The International Criminal Court

The International Criminal Court,established under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court,was established to be able to try the most serious international crimes such as the crime of aggression in the international community and to maintain the legal order of the international community.However,in the process of cracking down on international illegal and criminal acts,the contradiction with non-contracting sovereign states has always existed.In this study,the International Criminal Court was hindered by the United States in exercising its powers.On June 11,2020,the then US President Donald John Trump signed an executive order announcing: the imposition of economic sanctions and entry restrictions on the relevant staff of the International Criminal Court and their families,due to the illegal investigation by the International Criminal Court and its staff,Such investigations threaten the United States and its allies,especially the investigations conducted by the International Criminal Court prosecutors on U.S.military and intelligence personnel for the Afghanistan region,and have seriously threatened U.S.national security.Since the United States announced sanctions against the International Criminal Court,this act has caused a series of impacts on international law and the international legal environment.Therefore,this article attempts to discuss the issue from three perspectives: the core value of international law,the related issues of immunity of international organizations,and the specific impact of the US’s lifting of the sanctions.From the perspective of the core values of international law,the value composition of international law includes many necessary elements: justice,order,freedom,equality,security,human rights,etc.,and also includes the two necessary elements of democracy and the rule of law,which are used to ensure the realization of value of international law.The core value pursued by the International Criminal Court is the pursuit of universal justice.The sanctions imposed by the United States on the International Criminal Court are interfering with the International Criminal Court’s ability to perform its duties fairly and impartially and the International Criminal Court’s due process of justice.In the initiation mechanism of the International Criminal Court,the prosecutor plays two core roles: 1.Implementing the investigative function similar to that of the investigative agency in domestic criminal proceedings;2.The function of bringing a lawsuit to the International Criminal Court.When a prosecutor’s freedom of entry and personal property are destroyed and frozen,it will greatly limit the prosecutor’s investigation of relevant cases,undermine the prosecutor’s judicial independence,and prevent the case from being handled fairly and justly.In international dispute settlement,if a major country is allowed to interfere in the normal jurisdiction of an international judicial institution,and the petition of the weak cannot be protected by the international judicial institution and international law,then in fact,such behavior challenges the core value of the International Criminal Court and disrupts its the pursuit of universal justice.From the perspective of immunity of an international organization,the rights and obligations of an international organization depend on its relevant treaties and functions.Therefore,the immunity of an international organization is established on the basis of its necessary functions,and the right to immunity is granted to an international organization is going to ensure that international organizations can perform their assigned functions without interference.In this study,the actions of the International Criminal Court and its staff are based on the international organization’s own functions and treaty provisions.According to the functional immunity in the immunity of international organizations,although the United States is not a party to the Rome Statute and is not bound by it,from the perspective of international law,in order to ensure that the International Criminal Court can maintain the independence of its functions,and combined with the relevant legislation on the immunity of international organizations under the "International Organizations Immunity Act" in the United States,it can be concluded that the US sanction act does not have sufficient domestic and international legal basis to support it.From the perspective of the impact on international law of the US abolishing sanctions against the International Criminal Court,this paper finally analyzes the consequences of the voluntary cancellation of the sanctions from two aspects.It is known that in this article,the crimes committed by the US military in Afghanistan as investigated by the International Criminal Court Prosecutor deviated from the core values of international law: 1.It caused members of the international community to fall into war and disrupted the peace and tranquility of the international community;2.No The use of force against a sovereign country violates its national sovereignty on the basis of international legality;3.The harm to the life of Afghan civilians also violates the protection and respect for the basic human rights of individuals.The U.S.initiative to lift sanctions demonstrates the core values of international law,and at the same time,the basic human rights of officials of the International Criminal Court and the functional immunity of international organizations and their officials have been respected and protected.From the perspective of international law,the essence of this issue is the binding force of international law on the state.The United States’ initiative to cancel its interference in this investigation will have a huge impact on the current and future influence and binding force of international law.In terms of the impact of the International Criminal Court’s future exercise of jurisdiction,this removal of sanctions guarantees the realization of the prosecutor’s right to independently exercise investigative powers,and will reduce the obstacles to the International Criminal Court’s future exercise of jurisdiction over cases and increase the possibility of the realization of universal justice.