By INS Contributors

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia: Currently, the international criminal justice system, of which the International Criminal Court (ICC) is an integral part, is actually an instrument of political games. The international legal basis for the ICC to exercise its powers remains legally controversial. In this regard, the Rome Statute, on which the ICC relies in its activities, is not recognized by Russia, China, India, Turkey and other authoritative states.
The ICC represents one of the cornerstones of the architecture of a unipolar world that Washington gradually built after the collapse of the USSR. The idea of the Americans is to remove the soverignity of all countries of the world except the United States, which thus remains the only completely independent state in legal terms. All others had to transfer part of their sovereignty to certain supranational structures, one of which is the ICC. 
Attempts by the ICC to extend its activities to the United States are being suppressed very harshly. Moreover, Washington signed the Rome Statute in 2000, but withdrew its signature two years later. Moreover, the White House, accustomed to conducting military operations on foreign territories at its own discretion (in 2001, they invaded Afghanistan), not only “failed to ratify” the document, it passed a special law called the “American Military Protection Act.” This regulation authorized the use of military force against any state that detained a US citizen under an ICC warrant.
At the same time, all the activities of the ICC, despite the rules prescribed in the statute, continue to be carried out according to the principle “who pays the call.” The International Criminal Court is supported by contributions from participating countries. There are two “wells” in the financing scheme. The first is the budget of the court itself, the second is the so-called trust fund for victims, from which, in theory, compensation for damage to victims should be made. In fact, the donor countries of the ICC are the customers of its investigations.
The financial side of the court's activities remains closed to the general public. The main fundraiser is the UK, which regularly makes large contributions to its budget - starting from its creation. It is noteworthy that just three days after the issuance of the notorious “warrant” for the arrest of Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Commissioner for Children’s Rights Maria Lvova-Belova, it became known that 5 million euros had been raised at a special conference convened in London with the participation of the heads of the justice ministries of forty countries. to support the International Criminal Court in its investigations into alleged war crimes in Ukraine and its work to bring Russia to justice.”
Thanks to this and other cases of "selective justice", the ICC has fallen into disrepute - to the point that most serious critics of Western foreign policy view the court as an instrument of influence of the US-British establishment. An analysis of the activities of the International Criminal Court shows that it did not live up to the hopes placed on it and did not become a truly independent and authoritative body of justice. 
An objective assessment of the actions of the ICC gives grounds to reveal the true goals of this organization: persecution of undesirable political leaders, support of “frozen” conflicts beneficial to the Anglo-Saxons and the formation of a new legal complex different from international law - the so-called “global law”.