Why are tribunals very important among two or more countries?
If a nation is involved in claims with another nation, the question of how far each nation respects the independent sovereignty of the other and the integrity of its own judicial system arises. To this effect, tribunals play a crucial role of arbitrating the claims between the involved countries while at the same time recognizing and respecting the sovereignty and the judicial system of each country (Root, 1909).

For a sovereign country, there is no legal obligation that requires it to make any submission to a rule set up by a superior alien power. In this case, a tribunal plays an important role where a sovereign country can enter into a contract with the private individuals – the tribunal. In these settings, the tribunal is granted the right to redress the claims, but only to the conscience of the sovereign and at the same time be not under an obligation of a compelling force (Root, 1909).

In situations where the internal judicial system of a country can not be trusted to arbitrate a claim in a fair and just manner, tribunals play a crucial role. For example, in the case of crimes against humanity e.g. in Rwanda or when powerful individuals with the ability to sway the administration of justice are involved, e.g. in Sierra Leone, a tribunal is the best option to ensure the effective delivery of justice. The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, 1994 prosecuted those involved in genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. The Special Court for Sierra Leone was used for the prosecution of the former president of Liberia, Charles Taylor (Schabas, 2006).

Tribunals are not only in legal criminal law only, but also in among others, the health sector. In healthcare, tribunal plays an integral function either within or across countries. Tribunals in the healthcare sector have oversight, regulatory, and dispute resolution powers and are used to help in the governance and in the making of decisions in the sector (Hoffman & Sossin, 2012). Given the interconnectedness of the healthcare system, a tribunal provides order, uniformity, and peace in the sector while at the same time preventing abuse of human beings.

Tribunals a crucial in that they provide a path to peace in among countries and to the globe in general. For example, the International Criminal Court, which by virtue of its constitution and functioning is a tribunal, is an important entity is ensuring global order (Schabas, 2006). Grave crimes are a threat to security, peace, and the well-being of nations, and especially in the perspective of powerful individuals vs. weak citizen and powerful nations vs. third world countries.

How can the cultural and political differences that exist between nations affect a tribunal?

Culture and local politics within a country are a primary factor in the formation of the tribunal. The effect of culture and politics will determine the entire process from the formation to the functioning of the tribunal. For example, The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda was formed and successful in its mandate because of the...…backing, or military force to enforce their determinations. Therefore, after a tribunal concludes its work and produces its report, it is upon the countries involved to implement the recommendations made. If these recommendations are against a country, if there is no cultural or political will to implement them, they only remain on paper, for example, the indictment of the President of Sudan, Omar al-Bashir in the ICC, which has not been implemented to date.

Another limitation of tribunals is that, contrary to what was the expectation, tribunals do not deter potential criminals. One of the reasons for the formation of the ICC – which is an international tribunal – was to deter strong men from perpetuating or supporting war crimes and crimes against humanity. However, there has been no indication to show that this has been realized. Despite the success of such tribunals like the Tribunal of Rwanda and Yugoslavia, perpetrators still continue to carry out crimes against humanity, with the most recent case being the crimes against the Rohingya in Myanmar (Zarni & Cowley, 2014).

Lastly, the jurisdiction of tribunals is limited even within the involved countries. For example, in the United States, the Supreme Court of the United States is superior to any tribunal and any treaty that may form any tribunal. Even though any treaty to which the United States is binding (Root, 1909), the Supreme Court has the legal power to overturn any decisions made by a tribunal concerning the United States. This is a major limitation to the tribunal as it makes them ‘toothless.’…