• Overruling a decision of the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber, the ICC Appeals Chamber authorized an 
  investigation by the ICC prosecutor's office into alleged international crimes in Afghanistan, 
  including crimes that may have been committed by US military personnel. The ICC 
  prosecutor's office then accepted a request from Afghanistan to prosecute these crimes 
  domestically. As the Taliban returned to power, the ICC re-opened its investigation, but 
  decided to "de-prioritize" conduct by actors other than the Taliban or ISIS (i.e. excluding 
  conduct by the US military from the investigation). 
  i. Present the most compelling legal argument under international law for the ICC's 
  authority to continue: (a) its investigation into Afghanistan; and (b) its investigation 
  into the conduct of the US military. Also present the most compelling legal argument 
  against the ICC continuing its investigation into Afghanistan and including the US 
  military in its investigation. 
  ii. Take and defend a position on which legal argument on the ICC's authority to 
  investigate is the most compelling. 
  iii. Provide a political analysis that assess the controversy from the viewpoint of 
  international politics: Are there political arguments that support or are at odds with 
  your conclusion on the ICC's legal authority to investigate? Are there political 
  explanations that help us to better understand the ICC's decisions or the controversy 
  over the Afghanistan investigation?
•