What if the Nuremberg trials were conducted by German judges (some appointed by the Nazi regime)? This is a reality I have a difficult time believing in. The ICC does not take away from the sovereignty of separate countries (as someone put it), but rather when such states do not hold individuals responsible for crimes committed within their territory, their legitimacy and sovereignty. Is undermined. ICCs in Yugoslavia and Rwanda are absolutely needed and necessary to ensure that due justice is carried out.
The International Criminal Court was made so that countries that are UNWILLING or UNABLE to try the criminals are tried at a global scale, and punished for their atrocities. It only has jurisdiction if the national government prosecuting the case hands it over to the ICC for prosecution. Therefore, it should be promoted and recognized throughout the world. Of course, the US doesn't want one because they want to keep jurisdiction over criminals.
We need an international court because some crimes take place internationally. We need to have some court that can have jurisdiction if a criminal has fled that country. Or we need to have the ability to prosecute someone if they have committed a international crime. Otherwise how can you decide where it is tried.
Some human crimes such as murder, genocide and despotism should be considered universal. The International Criminal Court should have the authority to arrest people charged with heinous crimes within that jurisdiction. State and local courts can handle most things on their own. Yet sometimes more prominent crimes require greater prosecution. Hence the International Criminal Court should be recognized on certain matters.
There are no good reasons to recognize the International Court. No one would benefit from an international court, because is would result in more wasted money. Who would pay for said court? Who would be able to challenge said court? Who would ensure the court is just? There is no body of government that should have that kind of power. No.
Every country in the world has a unique set of laws and if you commit a crime in said country you are subject to those laws. International courts are very inconsistent with and contradictory to many national laws. They cause confusion and the country where the crime occurred almost always wants to prosecute the defendant in that nations courts.
We are supposed to be separate countries, not one above all others. To recognize the International Criminal Court would be to take a step towards a one world government altogether, and I don't think that'd be a very good thing at all. So no I don't think the International Criminal Court should be recognized for the precedent it'd set.