Comparative Study Of Factors In The Establishment Of The International Criminal Court

During the 1990s, the major liberal powers sponsored international crimes tribunals in the former Yugoslavia and pursue similar policies in Sierra Leone. Despite the appearance that war crimes tribunals were a normal part of international politics however, in Iraq and El Salvador and elsewhere, the interenational community made little or no attempt to bear the responsibility of prosecuting war criminals.This dissertation examines the politics behind the choice made by the major liberal powers about how to deal with the perpetrators of violation of international human rights in the aftermath of violent conflict. It focuses primarily on battles between politcal calculation and legal accountability to create and support international war crimes tribunals.This dissertation firstly review the history of the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal and the International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia,while combined with the policies adopted by the International community with prosecuting war crimes and violation of international human rights after the conflict in the Gulf, Sierra Leone and El Salvador, examines behaviors of the major liberal powers and the transgovernmental networks. Then it explains the major actors behind the choice of the major liberal powers adopted to create and support international war crimes tribunals, base on the neo-realism theory modified by Kocs. My point is that the internal constrains of the major liberal powers are the chief influence. Meanwhile, this dissertation emphasizes the functions of the transgovernmmental networks. In conclusion this paper as a interdisciplinary research combined with International Relation and International Law, I wish to do something good for this new interdisciplinary scholarship.