From terrorism to cyber crime to drug trafficking to state-sponsored terrorism, there is no doubt that the scale of crime has increased globally. International crime has changed in intensity, in methodology, and in its use of technology. As concerns about terrorists and other international criminals increasingly top the agenda of the international community, the value and legitimacy of strengthening such agencies of international justice are becoming more relevant and deserve further attention.

Such a response can be seen with international organizations, such as Interpol, and their attempts to support international law enforcement. Interpol is an international agency dedicated to being the world's pre-eminent police organization in support of all national and international organizations, authorities and services whose mission is preventing, detecting, and suppressing crime. Interpol is most effective as a global clearinghouse for information, where the top priority is to gather and disseminate accurate and complete intelligence related to criminal activity. It maintains vast databases of fingerprints, mug shots, and valid arrests warrants for wanted individuals. This function was an important piece in last week's arrest. Interpol has also been successful in drawing attention to the links between counterfeit goods and terrorism. In July of 2003, the group issued a report warning national governments that intellectual property crime is becoming the preferred method of funding for a number of terrorists groups.

While Interpol can facilitate international coordination and sharing of information, it cannot undertake street action. This meaning it does not have the enforcement powers that a national or local police force would have. It is essentially an organization whose members are national governments, and therefore it remains dependent on those governments for support both politically and financially. Some argue that this arrangement is the inherent flaw in the current international state-based system, where any coordinated global activity is still dependent on national interests, national political will and national financial support. Thus, the tension in the nature of authority in global politics is between the possibility of independent and powerful global organizations and the primacy of state sovereignty.

This tension is common of many international organizations that are established to promote international justice and uphold international law. The International Criminal Court (ICC) is one such organization that has been intensely debated over the last year. Although the ICC does have universal jurisdiction crimes against humanity, its membership is still made up of national governments. And even though its ratification was successful and it entered into force in July 2002, the ICC is still not supported by several countries, including the United States. Supporters of the ICC argue that it is an important step toward the creation of a global justice system as well as an example of the increased importance of international organizations as powerful actors in the current system. On the other hand, its critics argue that the ICC is just another example of an international organization created to further the interests of national governments with no real power as an independent actor on the global scene.

No matter which side you take on the debate of the legitimacy and authority of Interpol and the ICC, these international efforts do in fact call into question the need for and value of establishing a global justice system with policing powers and a judicial system. Is such a system even possible? And if it is, is it desirable for all international actors? As terrorist continue to operate on a global scale, are unilateral or ad hoc coalition responses going to be sufficient?

In thinking about these most pressing questions, do some additional research about existing international judicial institutions by surfing the following websites.

1		How would you define the international judicial system as it exists today? What institutions constitute its basic structure?
2		How do issues of morality fit into this system?
3		What do you see as the biggest obstacle when it comes to having an effective international judicial system?