Your email address will be used for Wildy’s marketing materials only. We will never give your email address to any third party.
Special Discounts for Pupils, Newly Called & Students
Browse Secondhand Online
Wildy's will be closed on Monday 29th May and will re-open on Tuesday 30th May.
Online book orders received during the time we are closed will be processed as soon as possible once we re-open on Tuesday.
As usual Credit Cards will not be charged until the order is processed and ready to despatch.
Any non-UK eBook orders placed after 5pm on the Friday 26th May will not be processed until Tuesday 30th May. UK eBook orders will be processed as normal.
Since the conception of an international criminal court, the United States played an intricate role in each international debate. The influential weight of the United States determined the outcome of creating temporary international criminal tribunals, international support for national tribunals, as well as any progress to create a permanent international criminal court of its liking. The one international criminal tribunal that has deviated from this weighted United States influence is the International Criminal Court.
Currently, throughout the international community, there are many anti-American criticisms concerning the foreign relations policies of the United States, in particular, its position on the International Criminal Court. Yet, all previous multinational and international criminal tribunals, which helped influence the creation of the International Criminal Court, had the support of the United States. The question this research attempts to answer has two parts. First, at the macro level, has there been an underlying position of the United States toward international criminal tribunals since the 1899 Hague Peace Conference that has remained constant through presidential administrations? If so, at the micro level, what is this underlying policy?