1.Introduction

According to international law, war crimes are those transgressions of treaties or customary law that subject the perpetrator to criminal prosecution. Therefore, war crimes as opposed to crimes against humanity and genocide must always occur in the context of an armed conflict, whether it be non-international or international .In their international relations between countries,all Members should desist from threatening or employing force against the political independence or territorial integrity of any state, or from acting in any other way that would be contrary to the objectives of the UN.The two basic components to war crimes are an aspect of context: "the behavior occurred within the framework of and was connected to an international or non-international armed conflict" and a mental component: knowledge and intent regarding the specific act as well as the surrounding context.[1]If any one country violates the territorial integrity of other nations without any provocation from the other country,the International tribunals will interfere and punish the country for its crime against humanity and for committing a war crime.For the purpose of dealing with war crimes, the countries have developed a new ethos of liberal legalism, based on widely accepted worldwide standards of acceptable human behavior with punishments for war crimes that offer retributive justice.

2.The benefits of having International War CrimeTribunals

The International Criminal Court (ICC), a permanent international war crimes tribunal,function is to serve as a deterrence to prospective war criminals.Prior to the formation of ICC due to the absence of a permanent war crimes court, officials in the armed forces and administration could be more inclined to carry out atrocities like the mass killings of ethnic groups in Rwanda in 1994 or East Timor in the 1980s and 1990s.[2]Many legal structures have collapsed due to disagreement with legal experts, establishing the rule of law is a challenging process to prevent warfare Since the necessary training can only be obtained through higher education, the process of transforming judicial institutions into liberal, democratic, and unbiased ones may take several generations. Authoritarian regimes may have formed the institutions that were developed before to the conflict, therefore making it difficult to recycle parts of those pre-conflict institutions.

In the case of Yugoslavia under the Tito communist administration, which ruled by decree there was no place for autonomous judicial system.Conflict in the former Yugoslavia's lands in the 1990s made it abundantly evident that the existing legal system was insufficiently strong and unbiased to try the mass murder case in a fair manner. . In this situation, the judicial infrastructure deficit of providing sufficient legal support to bring war crimes against such strong leaders and generals was filled by international criminal courts.[3]The independence and fairness of the International Criminal Court (ICC), which includes the prosecutor and judges, from national governments and the UN Security Council, is one of the key accomplishments and tenets of the Rome Statute. By virtue of its existence, the ICC is carrying out the Rome Statute's mandate, which was valiantly defended by a collection of governments with similar interests. This is among the greatest human rights and diplomatic triumphs in recorded history. [4]

3.Are International Courts Succesfully Preventing War Crimes?

Despite the establishment of International Criminal Court , Israel has never been effectively held accountable for its crimes against the Palestinian people. The International Criminal Court (ICC) function is to prosecute major international crimes such as war crimes, genocide, and Geneva Convention violations Under Article 7, apartheid is also expressly mentioned as a crime falling under the court's purview, which makes it particularly pertinent to the contemporary circumstances in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories.However, the ICC's deterrent effect of preventing war crimes is sometimes questionably inefficient considering how slowly it has brought cases against individuals.The expectation that Israeli leaders and officials would likewise be subjected to comparable trials for their war crimes and crimes against humanity has encountered more challenges, as Israel and the US have applied significant pressure and implemented a range of legal maneuvers to obstruct the holding of such a trial as well as any meaningful discourse regarding the guilt or innocence of their citizens.

As of 2023,there are 124 members in ICC and 41 states have neither signed nor become parties to the Rome Statute.The Court still needs greater international recognition and moremembers than the current memebers.The Office of the Prosecutor, above all, must develop in aneffective body for prosecuting international crimes.The Court faces a major issue with providing the essential safety for victims and witnesses. During war crimes,genocides etc,the witnesess who are willing to testify are frequently in grave danger and face tangible threats.Hence,procedural laws specifically allow for the "redaction" of witnesses' and victims' identities, rendering them unidentifiable in witness statements and submissions, and making them anonymous. [5]

4.Conclusion

My conclusion is that the decisions made by powerful States, or the Security Council regarding the ICC cannot be used against the Court. We are on the receiving end of this scenario, exactly as any other global institution. States and the Security Council remain the dominant players in this game.A lack of support or political actions by States that cast doubt on or even politicize the ICC's role can result in misconceptions or even criticisms that the Court, as a purely judicial, impartial, and non-political institution, cannot really respond to.It also has become standard procedure to give the accused a chance to defend their actions in front of the victims, their families, and the media, even in cases where the crimes they have committedsuch as rape, torture, and genocideare often heinous.During the Russia and Ukraine War,Russia used the justification of self defence even when there was no provoaction from Ukraine and the ICC did not effectively investigate this and provide justice to the casualties of war.Victims in international armed conflicts include civilians, prisoners of war, and injured and ill members of the armed forces on land and at sea.Protection is given to those who do not actively participate in hostilities in non-international armed conflicts, including personnel of the military forces who have given up their weapons.But why should there br victims and casulaities of war crimes if International tribunals woked effectively and prevented them.

Citations

1.War Crimes,available at https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/war-crimes.shtml (December 31,2023)

2.Chris McMorran;International War Crimes Tribunals,available at https://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/int_war_crime_tribunals (December 31,2023)

3.James Lockamyeir;"Pros and Cons of International Criminal Law and its Impact as a Transitional Justice Mechanism",available at https://www.standrewslawreview.com/post/pros-and-cons-of-international-criminal-law-and-its-impact-as-a-transitional-justice-mechanism (Decemebr 31,2023)

4.20 ICC Benefits;available at https://www.coalitionfortheicc.org/explore/20-icc-benefits (December 31,2023)

5.Jonathan Kuttab;"The International Criminal Courts Failure to Hold Israel Accountable",available at https://arabcenterdc.org/resource/the-international-criminal-courts-failure-to-hold-israel-accountable/ ( Decmber 31,2023)