It is not a question here of neutrality, but of coherence
A small country that has produced some of the most brilliant international jurists on the planet, Switzerland must capitalize on what makes its strength, the defense of the international legal order. In 1998, when the ICC was in its infancy, Swiss delegates played a major role in defining the international crimes that the future court should deal with. His motivation was clear: the Geneva Conventions were threatened with dilution by different powers. It was imperative to find a mechanism to “force” their implementation: the ICC.
Through its commitment, the Confederation has thus succeeded in strengthening the bible of humanitarian law. Nothing very surprising. Already in 1872, the co-founder of the Red Cross, Gustave Moynier, who had long thought that the pressure of public opinion would be sufficient to denounce serious violations of the laws of war, had himself resolved to the fact that It was necessary to create a criminal court to “force” compliance with the Geneva Conventions.
Under the influence of an internal climate in which people take pleasure in denouncing “foreign judges”, the Federal Council would be wrong to renounce what remains one of the country’s major assets: the promotion of international law seen as the best way to ensure lasting peace. It is not a question here of neutrality, but of coherence. The demonization of international legal bodies as we saw recently with the European Court of Human Rights would be contrary to Switzerland’s interests.
#Swiss
