Michael S. Greco
Chair, American Bar Association Center for Human Rights
Stanford-ABA Center for Human Rights ICC Conference
Stanford Law School
May 11, 2012
I am honored to participate in this important ICC conference on behalf of the
American Bar Association Center for Human Rights.
I begin by extending my thanks to Stanford Law School, Dean Larry Kramer and
Professor Allen Weiner for bringing us together today; to the esteemed ICC officials who
honor us by the their presence, including Madame Registrar Silvana Arbia, ICC VicePresident Cuno Tarfusser and ICC Senior Legal Adviser Shamila Batohi; to the eminent Ben
Ferencz, a pioneer and champion of international criminal justice; to U.S. Ambassador
Stephen Rapp, a wise and skillful leader in this vital field; and to Professors David Kaye,
Jennifer Martinez, Helen Stacy and Ruth Wedgwood, whose scholarship and commitment to
international law enlighten and inspire us.
I thank also Sasan Sam Shoamanesh, the ICC’s liaison and consultant to the ABA
Center for Human Rights on its new International Criminal Court Project, the subject of my
remarks today; and Michael Pates, Director, and Kip Hale, Senior Counsel, of the ABA
Center for Human Rights for their valuable work on the Center’s ICC Project and many other
human rights initiatives. I thank also all who have contributed to making this conference
possible.
* * * * * * On November 21, 1945, in the Palace of Justice at Nuremberg, Germany, U.S.
Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson, as Chief Nuremberg Counsel for the United
States, made his Opening Statement to the International Military Tribunal in Case No. 1, The
United States of America, the French Republic, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics v. Hermann Wilhelm Göring,
et al.
Justice Jackson said this:
The privilege of opening the first trial in history for crimes against the peace of
the world imposes a grave responsibility. The wrongs which we seek to
condemn and punish have been so calculated, so malignant, and so devastating,
that civilization cannot tolerate their being ignored, because it cannot survive
their being repeated. That four great nations, flushed with victory and stung
with injury stay the hand of vengeance and voluntarily submit their captive
enemies to the judgment of the law is one of the most significant tributes that
Power has ever paid to Reason.
The Third Reich indeed may have been the most malignant and devastating
regime in world history. Yet, out of the carnage, and the ashes, of WW II arose the
Nuremberg trials and these great human rights achievements: the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights, the Geneva Conventions, the Genocide Convention, and the broader
international legal framework under which we live today.
Nonetheless, the latter half of the Twentieth Century, despite adoption of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other important international instruments, was
nearly as bloody as the first half. Genocides in Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia and Darfur are
just several among too many examples of atrocity crimes that have riddled recent decades.
Those horrific crimes have proven that pledges of “never again,” no matter how sincere and
solemn, mean little without a credible and permanent force of justice for those who kill en
masse.
2
Indeed these repetitive cycles in human history — massive destruction and
depravity, followed by righteous indignation and reform, followed by yet more depravity and
paralysis — demonstrate that eloquent pledges and proclamations are not enough. The
words -- the imperative of -- “never again” must not merely be set to paper and left to
politics, but must be institutionalized under a just rule of law.
To that end, the American Bar Association in 1978 called for the creation of such
an institution -- a permanent international criminal tribunal dedicated to ending impunity for
atrocity crimes, to securing justice for victims and, by so doing, to deter future atrocities.
Twenty years later the ABA — led by then-ABA President Jerome Shestack, a co-founder of
the ABA Center for Human Rights — was among the key NGOs involved in developing the
Rome Statute that established the International Criminal Court. And since 1998 the ABA has
been calling for U.S. accession to the Rome Statute and, until that happens, for U.S.
engagement with, and support for, the ICC’s vital work.
This year, having declared repeatedly its strong support for the ICC, the ABA,
through the ABA Center for Human Rights, has determined to institutionalize its
commitment to international criminal justice.
The ABA Center for Human Rights ICC Project
I am therefore pleased to announce the decision of the ABA Center for Human
Rights, through its new International Criminal Court Project, to transform long-standing
ABA policy into concrete action. The ABA’s ICC Project, to be formally launched this fall,
will foster greater U.S. engagement and cooperation with the ICC in three ways:
First, by promoting practitioner engagement and training
-- The Center’s ICC Project will convene in-person and on-line best-practices
conferences, as well as training workshops for U.S. and international criminal law
practitioners.
3
-- The Project will also marshal the resources of the ABA and its partners to help
train ICC lawyers and staff.
-- Legal exchange missions to the U.S. by international lawyers and judges, and to
The Hague by U.S. lawyers and judges, will be organized.
-- The Center will work closely with Madame Registrar Silvana Arbia in these
training efforts, which have been formalized through an exchange of letters between the
Center and the Registry.
Second, the ABA’s ICC Project will facilitate direct engagement among and
between U.S. and ICC Officials
-- The Project will establish venues for ongoing dialogue and debate among ICC
officials, U.S. policymakers and stakeholders.
-- One such forum, for example, will convene American proponents and
opponents of the ICC to discuss U.S. policy toward the Court and ICC-related current events.
-- Another will compare and contrast features of American and international
criminal prosecutions, such as investigation methods; evidence discovery and its preservation
and presentation; pre-trial detention; examination and cross-examination of witnesses; and
appellate procedures.
-- Another will explore the policy reasons why support by the U.S. Government
of an effective international criminal justice system serves the interests of the U.S. and the
American people.
-- The Project also will facilitate private meetings between ICC and U.S. officials
to build mutual trust and understanding.
4
Third, the ABA will advocate for the ICC publicly and before the U.S. legislative
and executive branches
-- The ICC Project will deploy ABA members and other representatives of the
legal profession to advocate for greater U.S. engagement with and support for the work of the
Court in protecting human rights and eliminating impunity for genocide, crimes against
humanity, and war crimes.
-- Where appropriate, the Project will facilitate advocacy in support of U.S.
legislation and executive branch action that will benefit the ICC.
-- In addition, the Center’s ICC Project website will demonstrate the Project’s
multilateral approach to U.S. - ICC relations, and will help improve understanding of
international criminal law and the ICC’s role.
-- Among other features, the website will publish expert commentary on relevant
issues of the day, and will serve as a repository of international criminal prosecution and
defense best practices that emerge from the Project’s collaborative activities.
The ICC Project’s Board of Advisors
To guide these efforts and to maximize their impact, the Center is assembling a
bi-partisan ICC Project Board of Advisors comprised of eminent leaders in international law,
diplomacy and advocacy. To date, the following individuals have indicated their willingness
to accept appointment to the Board of Advisors:

Justice Sandra Day O’Connor

Judge Patricia Wald

Judge Thomas Buergenthal

Ambassador David Scheffer

Ambassador Thomas Graham
5

Ambassador Thomas Siebert

Ambassador Hans Corell

Prof. Emeritus of Law M. Cherif Bassiouni

Former State Department Legal Adviser William H. Taft, IV

Former State Dep’t Legal Adviser John Bellinger III; and

Director of The Planethood Foundation Donald Ferencz.
Additional distinguished individuals will join the Board of Advisors in the coming weeks.
The Purpose of the ICC Project
The purpose of the Center’s ICC Project is to dispel the myths and
misunderstandings that have impeded robust and reliable cooperation between the United
States and the ICC. By bringing together all stakeholders on a regular basis to talk, debate
and educate each other about what the ICC is; what it isn’t; how it works; why it’s important;
and who it helps, the ICC Project will help secure both the Court’s future and the cause of
international criminal justice. As we develop and implement initiatives in each of the
Project’s three areas of activity that I have described, our principal objective will be to
strengthen, and broaden, the U.S. - ICC relationship.
Why is the ABA undertaking this Project?
As the independent, national representative of the legal profession in the United
States, enjoying global reach and stature, the 400,000-member American Bar Association is
well-positioned to perform this leadership role. And the ABA Center for Human Rights —
the Association’s core entity on human rights concerns — is well-suited to implement this
Project. The Center is assembling key collaborators to inform and promote the ICC Project,
including the ABA Sections of International Law, Criminal Justice, and Individual Rights
and Responsibilities; and academic institutions and non-governmental organizations.
Conclusion
6
I conclude as I began, with words by Justice Jackson, these from his Closing
Statement at Nuremberg. He said:
Of one thing we may be sure. The future will never have to ask, with misgiving,
what could the Nazis have said in their favor. History will know that whatever
could be said, they were allowed to say. They have been given the kind of a Trial
which they, in the days of their pomp and power, never gave to any man ....
These words — and the Nuremberg trials — embody the just rule of law that we seek, and
which the International Criminal Court represents.
The International Criminal Court Project of the ABA Center for Human Rights
will say to those in the U.S. who may fear or doubt the ICC the following:
-- that the American legal profession believes in the ICC;
-- that the eminent, bi-partisan, members of the ICC Project Board of
Advisors believe in the ICC;
-- that support for the International Criminal Court not only serves the
interests of the United States, but safeguards the values that we as a
civilized people have long cherished;
-- that we are comfortable with the Court and its important role in the
world;
-- that everyone in America should be comfortable with the ICC and its
work, and here are the reasons why.
I invite each of you to join in this important conversation.
7