Law Graduate Martin Fee named winner of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission/Transitional Justice Institute Dissertation Prize

This year's Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (NIHRC)/Transitional Justice Institute Dissertation Prize has been awarded to Ulster University graduate Martin Fee for his dissertation titled: 'And Justice for All? How the relationship between the US and the ICC since 2017 has affected the legitimacy of the ICC and the credibility of the US in international criminal justice'.

Martin graduated with LLM in Human Rights and Transitional Justice (2022-2023) from Ulster University and his dissertation was submitted as part of his final year degree programme. As a prize, he was awarded a book voucher and has had details of his winning dissertation published on the NIHRC website.

Professor Siobhán Wills, TJI Director and Professor of Law at Ulster University said:

"I am delighted that Martin has been awarded this prize. His thesis, entitled 'And Justice for All? How the relationship between the US and the ICC since 2017 has affected the legitimacy of the ICC and the credibility of the US in international criminal justice' was an excellent piece of research.

"Martin was a committed, hardworking, participative, and intelligent student. Overall, he was an exemplary student. His supervisor, Dr Anne Smith (who took over the supervisory role after Dr Thomas Hansen), said she too is delighted Martin has been awarded this prize as it is richly deserved. Well done Martin!"

Congratulating Martin on his prize, Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (NIHRC) Chief Commissioner Alyson Kilpatrick said:

"The Commission offers its congratulations to Martin on being the recipient of this year's NIHRC/TJI Dissertation Prize. This prize is awarded annually by the NIHRC for the highest LLM dissertation mark. Well done Martin for this fantastic achievement and we wish you all the very best with your future endeavours."

In his thesis conclusion, Martin Fee stated:

"This thesis provides significant evidence of why the question of US credibility in ICJ was inherently interesting. US policies and actions and responses to them show that the US credibility in ICJ has suffered because of how they have engaged with ICJ and the ICC. This thesis has demonstrated that the US should no longer be considered a leading nation in ICJ. Understanding this and the US's disproportionate influence over the ICC is critical for fully understanding why the events in the timeline had particular relevance to the ICC's legitimacy perceptions."

He further concludes:

"The US-ICC relationship since 2017 damaged the ICC's legitimacy and the US credibility in ICJ. The US should repeal ASPA and ratify the Rome Statute. It appears logical that if major powers, particularly the US, ratified the Rome Statute, perceptions of the ICC's legitimacy worldwide would likely improve. The US is unlikely to make these steps at this stage. Undoubtedly, many would see this as bestowing credibility on the US in ICJ, which could seriously bolster the fight against impunity in the long term."

*ICJ - International Court of Justice

*ICC - International Criminal Court

*ASPA - American Service-Members' Protection Act

You can read Martin's dissertation at this link.