World
NewsOnScale Staff
September 30, 2026
On October 1, 1946, the Nuremberg Tribunal issued its judgment.
Twelve Nazi leaders were sentenced to death. Seven received prison terms. The trials established something that had never existed before in international law: the principle that heads of state, military commanders, and political leaders could be held personally accountable for crimes committed in office. No rank was a shield. No nation's sovereignty was a defense. "Just following orders" was no longer a defense at all.
Eighty years later, that principle remains largely theoretical.
What Nuremberg Built
The Nuremberg trials ran from November 1945 to October 1946. Twenty-four senior Nazi officials faced prosecution before an international military tribunal. The charges were new ones, crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity, categories that had to be invented because nothing in existing law had contemplated what Nazi Germany did.
The Nuremberg Principles, later codified by the United Nations, established that international law binds individuals, not just states. It established that crimes against humanity are prosecutable regardless of whether they violate domestic law. It established that a head of state who commits war crimes can be tried and executed.
It was the most ambitious legal reckoning in history. And it created an expectation that it named: never again.
What Nuremberg Failed to Build
What it did not create was a court with the power to enforce its own rulings.
The International Criminal Court, established by the Rome Statute in 2002, is the permanent institution Nuremberg made possible. It has 125 member states. It has prosecutors, judges, and the authority to issue arrest warrants for the worst crimes in the world.
It has no police force.
Every arrest the ICC has ever made happened because a government chose to hand someone over. Every warrant that has gone unserved exists because the suspect either leads the government that would have to arrest them, or because a powerful ally protects them.
The Enforcement Problem
The record is blunt. The ICC issued an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin in March 2023 for alleged war crimes in Ukraine. Putin has not been arrested. He has continued to govern Russia, attend international summits in ICC non-member countries, and direct the war. As long as he remains in power, legal scholars say there is practically no prospect of arrest.
In November 2024, the ICC issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza, including starvation of civilians, intentionally directing attacks against a civilian population, and willful killing. Netanyahu called the warrant "bogus" and said Israel "will never accept" the ICC's rulings. He addressed the United Nations General Assembly in September 2026. The United States, as UN host nation, is obligated to facilitate his presence, not arrest him.
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani said Netanyahu should be arrested if he came to the city. He then acknowledged the city cannot write its own laws on the matter.
The ICC's prosecutor, Karim Khan, who sought the Netanyahu warrant, was himself voted out by ICC member states in July 2026 amid a separate misconduct investigation. Netanyahu's office had attacked Khan by name four days before the vote.
Why It Can't Be Enforced
The ICC's founding problem is structural. It was built on consent. Countries join voluntarily, and most of the ones most likely to be investigated, Russia, the United States, Israel, China, have either never joined or withdrawn. The U.S. under the current administration has actively sanctioned ICC officials and opposed the court's jurisdiction over American personnel and allies.
Without a standing enforcement mechanism, the court depends on member states to make arrests. Member states depend on political will. Political will depends on whether arresting someone costs more than protecting them.
For the powerful, the math almost always favors protection.
What the Anniversary Means
Eighty years ago, the world decided that impunity for the worst crimes was intolerable. It built institutions to say so. Those institutions can name crimes, issue warrants, and write judgments. What they cannot do is put handcuffs on a sitting head of state whose allies control the Security Council, the host nation's obligations, and the flow of weapons to their wars.
Nuremberg convicted twelve men and hanged them. The ICC has outstanding warrants for two sitting heads of state and cannot serve either one.
The principle survives. The enforcement does not.
NewsOnScale is owned by AMILLI AI, Corp., founded by JJ Johnson.