> they can hold their own people accountable
Except when they can't, as in the case of senior government figures.
Except when they can't, as in the case of senior government figures.
It is a principle of democracy that senior government figures can be held accountable.
E.g. in the US, Trump, a former president and a potential future president, is currently in several trials.
E.g. in Israel, where Netanyahu is under trial in several cases (unrelated to the ICJ) and where e.g. a former PM was convicted of several charges and served time in prison.
Obama deserves an investigation and trial at the ICC for much the same reasons, but was somehow seen as better by the ICC and signing countries.
All of your examples are domestic crimes.
The examples are domestic crimes because the argument is that the US doesn’t need to be party to the Rome Statute because it would enforce similar penalties on servicemen and leaders using domestic jurisdiction. Others countered that the US somehow can’t do that despite the former president literally being on trial as we speak and the above commenter provided examples to the contrary.
https://crescent.icit-digital.org/articles/bush-and-associat...
Not seeing any mention of a conviction on the Wikipedia page though, which seems like it would have at least a mention:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_the_Internat...
---
This is pretty wild: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/03/16/icc-us-coope... (archived: https://archive.md/IDpQk)
That's clearly trying to pull some shit / suppress investigation into US activities.