There is need to keep the peace not only within a nation but also among nations.
The United Nations Organisation [UNO] was formed to maintain peace in the world among member nations.
But sometimes a member nation may attack another nation in one way or the other even going to war with that nation.
Also, sometimes, a nation may adopt policies inimical to the welfare of a fellow member nation of the United Nations Organisation.
A powerful nation like the United States of America [USA] sometimes takes action against a country that seems to act in a way that jeopardises the interests of another country.
Most countries of the world have an army, a police force and a system of courts through which law and order are maintained.
If a citizen of the country is aggrieved by another citizen, the aggrieved party may take his fellow to court in order to seek redress.
In Nigeria, for instance, there are customary and magistrate courts, high court and the federal court of appeal.
In most cases, the judges in these courts are not incorruptible and the judgements handed down are sometimes biased.
After the federal court of appeal hands down a decision, there is no further place a person may go if he feels he has not obtained justice.
There is sometimes a glaring case of injustice when political parties are involved.
A person may win a case in the State controlled lower courts only to lose at the federal controlled court of appeal.
It is obvious that either the State high courts are biased or the federal court of appeal is biased.
Some regional bodies of the world have formed a court where an aggrieved party may further pursue his case if he is not satisfied with the judgments handed down in his home country.
This is the case with the international court in Hague, Netherlands and also the European Court of Human Rights.
Member countries of the United Nations Organisation may at times adopt a policy inimical to the welfare of another.
In the 1980s Kuwait attempted to sell crude oil at a price that disregarded the welfare of other nations.
After warning Kuwait to desist from such sales, in vain, Iraq attacked Kuwait and ousted its president.
Then America warned Iraq to pull out of Kuwait, in vain.
America went through the security council of the United Nations Organisation and organised a military action against Iraq.
Iraq stood its ground under President Saddam Hussein.
The United States of America went ahead to get Britain, France, Germany and Japan to support military action against Iraq.
They also got Iraqi ally, the USSR to stand by and not aid Iraq. The war outcome turned out against Iraq.
America still went through the UN Security Council to demand that Iraq be stripped of biological weapons.
Finally, no biological weapons were found in Iraq up to this day.
After the end of the Second World War in 1945, America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, USSR, engaged in a cold war.
Each faction tried to get allies and sponsored insurgents in different countries around the world, most were member countries of the United Nations Organisation.
The USSR later collapsed leaving only America as a powerful first world country that can interfere in troubled spots around the world.
Because of trying to expand democracy worldwide, America has also gained opponents.
Many of these opponents have tried in one way or the other to destabilise American interests and people worldwide.
They have engaged in terrorist activities which Americans have sought to revenge.
America has sought to force other national governments to come to their (American) terms when they seek to fight insurgents.
But who is there to tell America when it is going beyond bounds?
Does the world need America or indeed any other policeman to be a dictator in international politics?
Does America have the right to label some people religious fanatics and dictate to them in order to bring them to order?
Truly, some national leaders adopt policies that are against their countrymen.
Sadly, they oppress their fellow citizens sometimes because they are in different political party or they come from different geopolitical regions.
But should another country interfere in the internal affairs of another sovereign state?
How should these issues be reconciled?
Justice continues to elude a large section of human society. When an issue arises, only a neutral person can offer an unbiased judgment.
A neutral person may come from another country that is not involved in the issue. This lends credence to the formation of q regional body.
It will take commitment by member countries to abide by the decisions handed down by such a body.
But a single country of the world, with its international interests, cannot always be impartial in piloting the affairs of other countries.
From Ephraim Elombah; Email: email@example.com, Phone: +2348055516177