international criminal law
. The fact is that the crime of aggression exists in international lawwhether it is being enforced or not, and has been committed time and time again since the Nuremberg Trials. This paper purports to trace and examine the elements of illegal aggressivewars, and to demonstrate how this supreme international crime has been committed by theworld’s superpowers in Iraq, Afghanistan and Kosovo. And yet in the midst of the death and de-struction that follows war, these powers have slipped neatly into the “loophole” of the law andonto a plane of immunity for their ‘supremely criminal actions’. The ultimate criticism of this pa- per is that since there are no war crimes without war, there is something inherently fallacious, il-logical and indeed, as Mandel observes, suspect with prosecuting and punishing these war crimeswhile “excluding aggression from international judicial scrutiny”
. It was hoped that this loop-hole could be mended by the proposal drafted by the Assembly of States Parties of the Interna-tional Criminal Court in Kampala last summer. As will be argued however, the jurisdictionalregime envisioned by this proposal is simply not comprehensive enough to pierce the screen be-tween aggressors and prosecution.
Nuremberg, the “Supreme International Crime”, and its place inInternational Law.
Michael Mandel, “How America Gets Away With Murder”, 2004, p 7.
Michael Mandel, “How America Gets Away With Murder”, 2004, see generally.