Part of the The International Criminal Court Unpacked series

Since its inception, the International Criminal Court has been accused of having a prosecutorial bias, particularly a sub-saharan focus. The bias is further suggested to be the consequence of the post-world war order asserting their influence. The investigation into war crimes committed by Russia on Ukrainian territory and the outcome would be the ultimate test as to whether this bias has been overcome. 

The court has had before it approximately 30 cases referring to situations with a sub-Saharan focus. This is while a referral of the situation in Syria since 2011 has been vetoed by China and Russia; and situations in Afghanistan (renewed investigation), Bangladesh/Myanmar, Georgia, State of Palestine (renewed investigation and the Republic of Philippines have seen investigations opened recently (2016 onwards). Whilst the recent investigations paint a picture of a court that is developing in its ability to investigate more universally, investigations in the past have stalled (Afghanistan among others), leaving the door open for future investigations to meet the same fate. The investigation opened into Ukraine may overturn this pattern and it would be key for two reasons; first, rebutting the sub-saharan focus that the court has been previously criticised for; second, rebutting the criticism that the International Criminal Court is a tool for the post-World War powers to project influence. 

The investigation, should it find war crimes, will suggest that the International Criminal Court would pass the test with flying colours as it would have dealt at outcome on the continent of Europe in relation to Russia, a country that is a part of the post-world war order accused of using the court to exert power, whilst also rejecting the jurisdiction of the court.