Benjamin Ferencz, former judge at the Nuremberg tribunal, says the Rome Conference was a "rare moment in history" that offers the world the opportunity to create "a more humane world under the rule of law".

"If nations fail to create a tribunal to punish crimes against humanity, it opens the door wide to more genocide, rapes and similar crimes. Nations must decide what kind of a world they want, " he said in an interview with TerraViva.

"Nuremberg has taught us that we live in a cruel world," Ferencz explained. "This rare moment in history to create a more humane world under the rule of law and diminish the cruelties should not be lost, lest future generations should look back on Rome and say that those who had it in their power didn't care enough or dare enough."

Many provisions in the ICC Statute had come under controversy because of states' fears about many issues, not least national sovereignty. This has raised concerns that the ICC agreement would not do enough to punish the very crimes it had sought to penalise.

For instance, governments have not been able to agree on a definition of "aggression" as a war crime, leading to its exclusion from the ICC document.

"The punishment of aggression and crimes against humanity were the cornerstones of Nuremberg," Ferencz recalled. "If aggressive war is excluded from the jurisdiction of the Court, this is an automatic grant of immunity to those leaders who commit what the Nuremberg Court condemned as the supreme international crime."

He said any leader of the United States, which has expressed its concern about a 'rogue' Court, need not fear being accused of aggression unless the Security Council concludes that aggression by the US has occurred. "The veto power remains intact and is in no way jeopardised by the ICC," he added.

"Under the UN Charter, only the Security Council is authorised to determine whether aggression by a state has occurred. If it fails to do so, any accused brought before the court would have to be released. On the other hand, a finding that aggression has occurred does not in any way imply that an accused individual appearing before the ICC must be found guilty," said Ferencz.

Independent judges can also free any accused they feel is not guilty, so "the court balances the powers of the Security Council, which are defined in the UN Charter," Ferencz pointed out.

The US fears the prospect of having its miltary officials hauled to the ICC for peacekeeping activities, but Ferencz said no US soldier will be tried for war crimes as long as it is and willing to give the accused a "fair trial". An opt-in regime, he warned, is an assurance for those who intend to commit crimes that they will never be tried. "The United States has nothing to fear from accepting a treaty creating an ICC here and now," Ferencz remarked.

As for the option of leaving key unresolved issues of the ICC for a protocol or some other venue after Rome, Ferencz likened the Court to a baby that must first learn to crawl before it runs. Alison Dickens