Copyright CanWest Interactive, Inc. Jul 15, 2008

Ten years ago this week, the UN General Assembly approved the creation of the International Criminal Court (ICC), a permanent global tribunal to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. The event was covered lavishly in the Western media, and praised as the beginning of a new era in global human rights.

A decade later, we know better. Since 2002, when it came into force, the ICC has issued public arrest warrants for only 12 people -- all of them obscure participants in remote African conflicts. (And even within that small group, just four individuals are in custody.) For all its high hopes and lavish spending (the ICC's budget was [currency] 80-million last year), it has done little to advance the cause of human rights.

ICC supporters hope this will now change: On Monday, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, the ICC's prosecutor, formally requested an arrest warrant for Omar Hassan al-Bashir, Sudan's President, on charges of genocide and crimes against humanity in the country's Darfur region.

For the ICC, the case against al-Bashir marks a double-first: the first time the tribunal has brought charges against a sitting head of state, and the first time it has brought charges of genocide against anyone. A conviction of al-Bashir would constitute a giant landmark in the global struggle for human rights.

We doubt that will happen, however. Sudan -- like all outlaw nations -- has sneered at the ICC since its creation. So long as al-Bashir stays within Sudan, he will remain a free man.

What's worse, the ICC's decision to go after al-Bashir may actually increase suffering among Darfur's brutalized population. Already, NGOs (including those operating under the UN banner) have begun moving personnel out of the country, fearing a backlash from al-Bashir's regime. The ICC action also has caused an uptick in nationalistic support for the President, making his ouster less likely in coming years.

The problem the ICC has with al-Bashir symbolizes the larger dilemma that afflicts the global campaign for human rights more generally: The truly important evil-doers -- the ones we'd all like to see behind bars in The Hague -- are far too powerful to be brought to justice by UN do-gooders. So instead, the ICC must content itself with small fry.

The ICC came into being in the late-1990s, a period during which Western elites saw war as passe, and believed the world's problems could be solved through legalisticmultilateralinstitutions such as the ICC. Unfortunately, history has debunked that view. The only way ICC prosecutors will ever get their hands on al-Bashir is if we invade his country -- something no Western leader would ever be willing to do.

Credit: National Post