Authored By: Shalom Manamela
Noida International University
Introduction
Each nation cherishes its independence, the power to decide, to govern and to protect its people under its own laws it made. Yet history has repeatedly showed us that independence without accountability can sometimes lead to silence, impunity and a lot of unimaginable suffering. From the genocide which took place in Rwanda to the ongoing tragedies in Gaza and Sudan. The world continues to see how unchecked power destroys humanity itself.
The modern international order rests on two powerful ideas which are mainly state sovereignty defined as the right of nations to govern themselves and international justice which is defined as the principle that certain crimes are so grave or so horrendous that they offend all humanity in all possible ways. The tension between these ideas which are independence and humanity lies at the heart of today’s struggle for global justice.
As an international student and an aspiring advocate for justice, I see that this not as a legal debate but a moral one. For me, accountability is not a limitation of sovereignty, it is rather its most honest expression.
The Essence of State Sovereignty
State sovereignty which is enshrined in Article 2(1) of the United Nations Charter, it affirms that all states are equal and are all free to figure out their own affairs without any external interference. This principle is born after centuries of colonial domination which is still the foundation of international peace and order.
For newly independent nations like India, sovereignty to them represented dignity restored, the ability to make and enforce laws without subordination from any external power. It literally protects national identity, ensures stability and shields all states from political manipulation by other stronger nations.
However, sovereignty is not absolute. The UN Charter itself recognizes limits, particularly where peace, security and fundamental human rights seems to be threatened. A state’s independence can never justify genocide, war crimes or any crimes against humanity. When leaders commit atrocities against their own people, they cannot use principle of sovereignty as a shield for silence.
The Birth of Global Accountability
The idea that the world has a collective duty to respond to grave crimes literally appeared in the ashes of World War II. The Nuremberg Trials (1945 to 1946) introduced a revolutionary principle which focused on individuals, not just states could be held criminally responsible or liable for violations of international law. No one could use, “Following orders” as an excuse for crimes against humanity.
This spirit of accountability, it evolved into a permanent institution though the International Criminal Court (ICC) which was set up under the Rome Statute of 1998. The ICC can prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression when national systems fail or refuse to act.
Its existence reminds us as the world that justice has no borders. It reflects the belief that certain acts such as mass killings, torture, systematic persecution and many more are crimes against all humanity.
Independence vs. Justice: A Necessary Tension
A large number of nations which includes the following India, the United States and China have not ratified the Rome Statute. Their hesitation lies in fears that the ICC could be used politically, or it could interfere with national sovereignty. These concerns are not unfounded as international justice at times have been unevenly applied, particularly in conflicts involving powerful states.
Yet, complete rejection of accountability risks creating a world where justice literally depends on power and not principle. Sovereignty without checks can turn into impunity which is justice without respect for sovereignty, and this can become domination.
The complementarity principle in the Rome Statute, it offers a bridge between these extremes. It ensures that the ICC can step in only when the national courts do not prosecute international crimes. It’s far from undermining sovereignty as this principle reinforces it while also encouraging states to strengthen their domestic legal systems to prevent external intervention.
In this sense, true sovereignty is not literally the ability to act without consequence rather it is the willingness to hold oneself accountable.
Lessons from India and Beyond
India’s engagement with international criminal law literally reveals a nuanced balance. Though it is not an ICC member, she has taken part in UN peacekeeping operations, and she has supported the establishment of tribunals for Rwanda and Yugoslavia and contributed to drafting the Rome Statute itself.
This duality reflects a larger truth which is, India values justice but it guards its independence fiercely. The lesson is that sovereignty and global justice need not be opposing forces at all. Nations can cooperate in international accountability mechanisms while keeping control over domestic prosecutions.
Similarly, the global response to crises from Ukraine to Gaza reveals the real world’s moral struggle. Each time civilians are bombed, children are starved, or humanitarian corridors are denied, humanity confronts a question which is larger than politics and that question is the quantity of suffering will the world tolerate in the name of sovereignty?
Accountability, whether through the ICC or domestic courts answers that question with courage by insisting that other crimes are simply too grave or horrendous to ignore.
Why Accountability Still Matters
It Restores Dignity lost to Victims.
- For survivors of genocide, war crimes and mass atrocities, justice is not about punishment, it’s rather all about recognition. It tells them that the world saw what happened and that their pain mattered that why it acted.
- It Deters Future Atrocities
- Even though international courts cannot prosecute every offender, their existence sends a message which is impunity will not last forever. The trials of leaders like Slobodan Milošević, Charles Taylor and Omar al-Bashir still stand as reminders that power is temporary but justice is very persistent.
- It Strengthens Global Order
- Accountability promotes the rule of law across borders and It assures smaller nations that international norms apply equally to all thereby fostering trust in the international system.
- It Reflects Our Shared Humanity
- Ultimately, accountability can transform legal norms into moral truths as it acknowledges that our shared humanity transcends borders and that justice anywhere strengthens peace everywhere.
Challenges and the Path Forward
The road to global accountability stays imperfect. Political interests more often overshadow moral duty. The UN Security Council’s veto power can paralyze international justice as seen in cases where powerful allies shielded each other from investigations.
Moreover, the ICC faces resource constraints and accusations of bias toward developing nations. Restore legitimacy, the world must reform these institutions by democratizing their structure, ensuring fair representation and strengthening their independence from all political pressure.
Equally important, states must invest in domestic justice systems which can prosecute grave crimes themselves. When nations uphold justice internally, they protect both sovereignty and humanity.
Conclusion
Independence gives nations the right to lead themselves while humanity gives them the responsibility to lead justly. The balance between the two defines the soul of modern international law.
Accountability literally does not weaken sovereignty rather it redeems it.
It transforms independence from a symbol that of isolation into an instrument which is of moral leadership.
As a young voice in the study of law, I believe our generation must redefine what sovereignty means. It should no longer be a shield against justice but a pledge to uphold it. The future of peace will not be built by those who hold power but by those who hold themselves accountable for how they use it.
Because in the end, the true measure of a nation’s independence is how fiercely it protects humanity, not only within its borders but beyond them.
Reference(S):
- Charter of the United Nations art. 2(1),26 June 1945, 59 Stat. 1031, T.S. No. 993.
- Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 17 July 1998, 2187, U.N.T.S. 3.
- Prosecutor v. Tadić, Case No. IT-94-1, Decision on Jurisdiction (Int’l Crim. Trib. for the Former Yugoslavia 2 Oct. 1995).
- U.N. Secretary-General, Implementing the Responsibility to Protect, U.N. Doc. A/63/677 (12 Jan 2009).
- International Criminal Court, Situations and Cases, www.icc-cpi.int.
- Indian Ministry of External Affairs, Statement on the Rome Statute (July 1998).
