United nations, EU, where are you??

What do you mean by "member states of the ICC"? Are US-citizens members of the courts?

If I am not mistaken the ICC does indeed have a prosecutor who is empowered under the treaty to initiate prosecutions. As you and I have already noted the parent state of one who is so accused under the treaty can preempt legal action by the ICC by initiating its own legal proceeding.

The Chief Prosecutor may start an investigation upon referral of situations in which there is a reasonable basis to believe that crimes have been or are being committed. Such referrals must be made by a State Party or the Security Council of the United Nations, acting to address a threat to international peace and security. In accordance with the Statute and the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, the Chief Prosecutor has to evaluate the material submitted to him before making the decision on whether to proceed.

In addition to State Party and Security Council referrals, the Chief Prosecutor may also receive information on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court provided by other sources, such as individuals or non-governmental organisations. The Chief Prosecutor will conduct a preliminary examination of this information in every case. If the Chief Prosecutor then decides that there is a reasonable basis to proceed with an investigation, he will request the Pre-Trial Chamber to authorise an investigation.

As a consequence of its mandate, the Office comprises both Investigation and Prosecution Divisions. The former is mainly responsible for preliminary examinations and the conduct of investigations (such as collecting and examining evidence, questioning persons being investigated as well as victims and witnesses). In this respect, the Statute requires the Office to extend the investigation to cover both incriminating and exonerating facts, recognising the responsibility to strive to establish the truth in every case. The Prosecution Division has a role in the investigative process, but will have principal responsibility for the litigation of cases before the various Chambers of the Court.

The principle of complementarity
The Preamble of the Rome Statute recognises that the Court itself is but a last resort for bringing justice to the victims of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. It therefore calls upon all States to take measures at the national level and enhance international co-operation to put an end to impunity, and reminds States of their duty to exercise criminal jurisdiction over those responsible for such crimes. Thus, the Rome Statute assigns the Court a role that is complementary to national systems.

When will the court decide that it is time for its "complimentary" role to begin with Sudan?

Given the energy with which France and Germany pressured then candidate states for EU membership against signing bilateral agreements on the matter with the U.S. and their current indifference to the slaughter in the Sudan, I find it very difficult to suppose that the real motive of these signatorys is the promotion of justice in the world.

The pressures after we signed such a treaty with Bulgaria a year or so ago were widely reported, including statements by the Foreign Ministers of both countries. You may recall that some of the issues directly concerned U.S. troops participating in UN and NATO peacekeeping operations.

Given the energy with which France and Germany pressured then candidate states for EU membership against signing bilateral agreements on the matter with the U.S. and their current indifference to the slaughter in the Sudan, I find it very difficult to suppose that the real motive of these signatorys is the promotion of justice in the world.

pressured then candidate states for EU membership

1.2 million: the number of refugees forced out of their homes in Darfur, western Sudan in the past 18 months

36,000: the best estimate of the dead - the figure may be 100,000

377: villages found destroyed or damaged in a recent US satellite survey of 578 settlements

200,000: refugees likely to be in poverty-stricken neighbouring Chad by the end of the year

350,000-plus: people who could die in the next few months from disease and malnutrition

1 for every 285 people: provision of latrines in Kalma camp in July, against the aid agencies' target of 1 in 20. That was before mass increase in the number of refugees there

30 days: time the UN gave the Khartoum government to rein in the Janjaweed, or face sanctions

2 million: lives at risk, says chief of UN humanitarian operations, Jan Egeland

A day, a week, a month: all that may be left as the hunger crisis intensifies and the coming rainy season makes the health problems of mass refugee camps worse than ever

The EU said yesterday there was widespread violence in the Darfur region of Sudan but the killings were not genocidal, a potentially crucial distinction which underlined its reluctance to intervene.

"We are not in the situation of genocide there," Pieter Feith, an adviser to the EU's foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, said in Brussels after returning from a fact-finding visit to Sudan.

"But it is clear there is widespread, silent and slow killing and village burning of a fairly large scale. There are considerable doubts as to the willingness of Sudan's government to assume its duty to protect its civilian population against attacks."

He said in the absence of willingness to send a significant military force, the EU and others had little choice but to cooperate with Khartoum.

The announcement is bound to anger those impatient for stronger international pressure on Sudan.

Last month the US House of Representatives voted by 422 votes to nil to describe Khartoum's actions as genocide, a conclusion shared by several analysts who say there is no other term for the systematic slaughter, rape and expulsions.

But the White House, the African Union and groups such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have so far avoided using the g-word. At least 30,000 people are thought to have died and 1 million displaced in what the UN has called the world's worst humanitarian crisis.

Genocide is defined as a calculated effort to destroy a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, but the debate over its meaning is political, not semantic.

The genocide convention, adopted by the UN in 1948, calls on signatories to "prevent" and "punish" genocide. If governments accept events in Darfur amount to genocide they would be obliged to intervene.

Given the risk of such a logistical and military challenge, that is something few governments are willing to contemplate.

The EU said yesterday there was widespread violence in the Darfur region of Sudan but the killings were not genocidal, a potentially crucial distinction which underlined its reluctance to intervene.