Context: Recently, the USA has authorised sanctions against International Criminal Court (ICC) officials involved in investigations into possible war crimes by USA troops and its allies.
Background

• The turbulent relationship between the US and the International Criminal Court (ICC) further exacerbated this week, after President Donald Trump authorised sanctions against ICC officials involved in investigations into possible war crimes by US troops or those of its allies.
• The Trump administration, which has long considered the international law forum a threat to US sovereignty, announced the strict punitive measures that Washington generally reserves for use against terror groups and those accused of abusing human rights.

Key Points

• Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, the country’s top diplomat, called the 123 nations-strong tribunal a “kangaroo court”. US officials have also blamed Russia for manipulating the ICC in its favour. 
• In 2019, the ICC’s chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda asked for a formal probe into alleged atrocities committed during the Afghanistan War between 2003 and 2014– leading to possible indictments of US military and CIA officials. The Trump administration reacted by revoking the Gambian lawyer’s US visa. 
• Washington has broadened the visa restrictions on ICC officials directly involved in probes against its nationals or those of its allies. The restrictions also extend to the officials’ family members. 

About International Criminal Court (ICC)?

• The ICC, a permanent judicial body based at The Hague in the Netherlands, was created by the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (its founding and governing document), and began functioning on 1 July 2002 when the Statute came into force.
• The forum was established as a court of last resort to prosecute offences that would otherwise go unpunished, and has jurisdiction over four main crimes: genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. 
• 123 nations are States Parties to the Rome Statute and recognise the ICC’s authority; the notable exceptions being the US, China, Russia, and India.
• Unlike the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the ICC is not part of the United Nations system, with the UN-ICC relationship being governed by a separate agreement. 
• The ICJ, which is among the UN’s 6 principal organs, mainly hears disputes between nations. 
• The ICC, on the other hand, prosecutes individuals– its authority extending to offences committed in a member state or by a national of such a state.
• The ICC has been criticised for not pursuing investigations in Western countries (all 4 of its guilty verdicts pronounced so far are in trials from Africa), as well as for working inefficiently. 
• Last year, the court ordered an independent expert review of its own functioning to address these concerns.
• The International Criminal Court (ICC) was established as a court of last resort to prosecute offences that would otherwise go unpunished.
• It relies on cooperation with countries for support, especially for making arrests, transferring arrested persons to the ICC detention centre, and placing certain restrictions such as freezing the assets of suspects, enforcing sentences, etc.
• State cooperation is necessary for ICC to function effectively. This factor renders its efficacy low as perpetrators of crimes can take over governments and avoid facing justice through the ICC.
• It has been accused of being a tool for western imperialism.

India and ICC
India did not sign the Rome Statute because of the following reasons:

• National interests
• State sovereignty
• Problem to find impartial prosecutors
• Difficulty in collection of evidences
• Crime definition