Sample Thesis Paper
The preference of prosecuting crimes against humanity is preferable at the scene of the crime since it not only acts as a measure of justice in the eyes of the people who have been victims of this crime. It also provides closure for those people. Additionally, placing the trail there also prevents the accused from escaping due process and also ensures that high ranking government officials will be judged under the same system as lower ranking ones. Difficulties stemming from the pursuit of justice are related to the politicizing of such trails. How courts may convict not because of evidence, but to satiate public opinion and gain political favor among the populace. Additionally, the presence of such a trail in the origin of the crime acts as a conflict of interest on the part of the country. Finally, a possible miscarriage of justice opens the country to criticism from the world community. It also makes possible, repercussions in the form of sanctions or even criminal proceedings against the government officials who ordered such a trail.
Hague is the best place in terms of the complementarity principle. The International Criminal Courts themselves have admitted that the international criminal courts there are only interested in prosecuting individuals who represent a significant political and non political influence in today’s world and have committed said crimes against humanity (Ehrlich, 2009). When they speak of this they of course mean that they will not prosecute cases which are minor in origin and have their place in civil courts. Thus, Hague provides a neutral location where the International Criminal Court can prosecute heads of government without fear of political repercussion from their or any other country.