Enforcement

The question of enforcement arises immediately when people first learn of a new and licensed International Court of Human Rights. There have been several attempts in recent years to form so-called “common law” courts or citizens’ grand juries to address the crisis in international justice. But as these courts have lacked jurisdiction in codified law, they have therefore lacked meaningful enforceability. They have served to “raise awareness” of grievous human rights abuses, thus performing a valuable service, but justice has not ultimately been served or carried out.  In the absence of meaningful deterrent, the systemic violations continue. 

The ACIJ’s primary goal is to ultimately lessen the vast human suffering caused by the systemic violation of human rights by which the criminal corporate elite does its daily business. Justice must not only be done, but must be seen to be done. Then perpetrators will hesitate before committing further violations. Then impunity will end.

A court of law must be public and transparent to be legitimate. Secret courts and secret law are, by definition, not legitimate. The ACIJ has an infrastructure and foundational basis which is fully consistent with all details of the relevant body of international law – this is one of the three criteria under international law which trigger the Court’s statutory authority – and so, of course, the Court is public and transparent as to enforcement mechanisms.  

Judicial Discretion Regarding
Enforcement Mechanisms in Specific Cases

While functioning with appropriate public transparency, the ACIJ is not required to divulge in advance to potential opponents of justice which specific mechanisms of enforcement may be used in any particular case. 

Specific Mechanisms of Enforcement

As a licensed court with statutory authority under international law the ACIJ is able to utilize fast-track mechanisms customarily in use to enforce judgments handed down by licensed international courts. Enforcement mechanisms exist and are in daily use – but have not been used against the governments, agencies, and officials which are controlled by the criminal corporate elite. Registering liens against assets to enforce punitive damages is only one example of such mechanisms. The filing of liens and adverse credit reports triggers mandatory enforcement and collection as a practical reality, and thus may be expected to be particularly effective against hitherto untouchable figures.

Arrest and Imprisonment

Clearly, in cases of actual arrest, the inherent common law and constitutionally protected powers of local sheriffs will be utilized. This will be done on a case by case basis in locations where sheriffs are willing to enforce the court's judgments. Codified international law contains mandatory provisions requiring country prison facilities to accept prisoners arrested by local sheriffs on the basis of a Warrant issued by any international Court.  If this has never been used, it is only because no international Court has been willing to issue such valid Warrants – until now.

Judge’s Manual of Human Rights Enforcement

The host NGO of the ACIJ, during the planned Phase II operations, will be publishing the Judge’s Manual of Human Rights Enforcement, as an official university textbook to serve as a practical handbook for plaintiffs, human rights advocates, and lawyers worldwide to provide detailed information on the relevant body of law, providing examples of typical violations. The Manual will also promote public, official and judiciary awareness of the mandatory provisions of international law, which are binding on all UN member countries, for effective enforcement of Court Orders, Warrants and Judgments of an international Court. 

Range of Enforcement Options

The following provides an overview of enforcement options available to the ACIJ as a licensed international court:

  1. Chamber of Compliance Judges:  A division of the ACIJ which oversees enforcement of judgments, registers domestic liens and filings, issues punitive orders.
  2. Punitive Orders for Non-Compliance:  Civil “Contempt” and Criminal “obstruction of justice” orders with severe penalties for each and every instance of non-enforcement.
  3. Critical Mass of Liabilities:  Every adverse act is a new violation, producing a “snowball effect” as liabilities of agencies and officials reaches critical mass.
  4. International Alliances: NAM and BRICS nations constitute 80% of all countries, demanding the restoration of International Law.  Only ONE country needs to seize bank account funds of a violating state’s embassy in the host country to set an example of global enforcement of international law.
  5. Economic Sanctions: Liens and Credit Report filings against agencies and officials
  6. Fast-Track Enforcement:  Two U.N. laws for automatic adoption of Arbitration Awards
  7. UN NGO Advocacy:   The host NGO of the ACI can accredit delegates to UN working sessions.