International Criminal Court must act on Yazidi atrocity

The court has the power to fulfil its core mandate by prosecuting individuals for genocide and crimes against humanity, Kirsty Brimelow, QC, and Akila Radhakrishnan argue

Go to the profile of The Brief team
Aug 07, 2017

If you are a registered user on The Brief, please sign in.

The Brief provides exclusive access to the highest quality legal journalism, intelligence and thought-provoking analysis.


Go to the profile of Michael Hocken
Michael Hocken 11 months ago

The UK could and should take a leading role in seeking to build international consensus on an approach such as that advocated so compellingly by KB and AR, if only because our pusillanimous posturing in the past led almost ineluctably to this horrendous tragedy. 

It would, moreover, be a potent demonstration of our willingness and desire to remain an active player on the global human rights front, despite our withdrawal from the EU and our increasing introspection on so many issues. 

There is also real concern that the signals being given out by May, Johnson and Fox suggest (at the very least) that the U.K.'s silence on human rights issues can be bought in return for promises of future trade deals post-BREXIT. 

This is at total contrast with the growing assurance of other EU countries' pronouncements on such matters, including Germany, to the point that the legitimacy of the U.K.'s continuing membership of the Security Council is being more seriously questioned than at any time in the past 45 years. Whilst it is most unlikely that the U.K. will lose its place, the likelihood of an overhaul of Council membership grows apace, and the net result would almost inevitably be a dilution of the U.K.'s relative influence through the addition of extra members, of which Germany would have to be one. I happen to think that would be a good thing overall, but it would be but one more indicator of the need for the country to redefine its post-EU role in the world.