Crossing Lines Television Show: A Critical Look at the NBC Crime Drama
The NBC crime drama Crossing Lines captivated audiences with its premise of an international police unit working for the International Criminal Court (ICC). Led by veteran actor William Fichtner, the show boasted high production values and a diverse cast representing various European nations. The concept of detectives from different countries collaborating to solve complex cases proved inherently appealing.
However, the show’s portrayal of the ICC drew significant criticism for its inaccuracies and misrepresentations. The central issue lies in the fictional ICC team’s mandate to investigate crimes like serial killings, drug smuggling, and human trafficking—offenses that fall outside the ICC’s actual jurisdiction. The ICC primarily focuses on war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, and the crime of aggression.
The pilot episode attempts to address this jurisdictional discrepancy with a weak explanation involving “topical crimes” and “illicit global trades.” Later, a character argues that a serial killer case constitutes “a crime of aggression that is ongoing, systematic, and crosses borders.” This interpretation drastically stretches the legal definition of aggression recognized by the ICC.
Further complicating matters, the show introduces a subplot where the ICC initially resists the team’s formation due to concerns about infringing on national sovereignty. This concern, while valid in the real world context of international law, is quickly overcome by a contrived appeal to emotion and a vaguely defined order from an ICC magistrate. The entire sequence highlights the show’s loose grasp of the ICC’s legal framework and operational procedures.
The inaccuracies extend beyond the central premise. Minor details, such as an incorrect ICC logo, a misplaced setting (Holland instead of the Netherlands), and technologically advanced equipment beyond the ICC’s budget, contribute to an overall impression of carelessness in depicting the Court. Even the seemingly insignificant detail of an English-only parking sign at the supposedly international court undermines the show’s credibility.
While dramatic license is expected in fictionalized accounts, Crossing Lines takes liberties that potentially damage the ICC’s image and public understanding. The show’s portrayal could reinforce misconceptions about the Court’s role, powers, and jurisdiction among viewers unfamiliar with international criminal law. This misinformation is particularly concerning in the United States, where skepticism towards the ICC is already prevalent. Crossing Lines risks exacerbating this skepticism by presenting a distorted view of the Court’s function and capabilities.
A more plausible setting for the show’s premise would have been Interpol, an international organization that facilitates police cooperation across borders. Interpol’s existing involvement in combating transnational crime aligns more closely with the investigations depicted in Crossing Lines. Choosing Interpol would have eliminated the need for convoluted justifications and inaccuracies surrounding the ICC’s jurisdiction.
Despite initial interest, Crossing Lines ultimately failed to garner consistently high ratings and was canceled after three seasons. However, its misrepresentation of the ICC remains a significant point of contention for those concerned about accurate portrayals of international institutions in popular media.
